By  the  Same  Author. 


A  STUDY  OF  THE   CONSTITUTION    OF-THE 

METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH,    .    .  $0  60 

EVOLUTION  OF  CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINES,  .    .     i  00 

MANUAL  OF  METHODIST   EPISCOPAL 

CHURCH    HISTORY i  75 

INTERROGATORY    STUDIES  IN    BIBLE   HIS- 
TORY,             75 


ArMINIANISM  in  HISTORY; 


OR, 


The  Revolt  from  Predestinationism. 


GEO.  L.  CURTISS,  M.  D.,  D.  D., 

Professor  of  Historical  Theology  in  the  School  of  Theology 
of  DePauw  University. 


^ 


CINCINNATI:  CRANSTON  &  CURTS. 
NEW  YORK :  HUNT  &  EATON. 

1894. 


COPYRIGHT 
BY  CRANSTON  cS:  CURTS. 


PREFACE. 

— ♦ — 

When  it  became  necessary  to  give  a  class  in 
Historical  Theology  a  careful  view  of  Arrainian- 
ism  in  its  historical  as  well  as  doctrinal  charac- 
ter, I  found  material  for  such  a  study,  but  it 
was  undigested,  ill-arranged,  and  very  unsatis- 
factory. After  a  careful  search  I  failed  to  find 
a  book  on  the  subject  that  could  be  recommended 
to  students.  A  copy  of  Brandt's  "  Life  of 
James  Arminius"  could  not  be  found,  though 
a  large  dealer  advertised  at  times  for  a  year  for 
it.  Only  recently  I  ran  across  it  in  an  old 
French  second-hand  bookstore  in  New  Orleans. 
Driven  to  gather  and  arrange  such  material  as 
could  be  obtained,  there  resulted  these  chapters 
in  the  form  of  lectures,  which  were  delivered  to 
the  class,  discussed,  revised,  and  delivered  a  sec- 
ond time.  After  this  they  were  re-written  and 
put  in  the  present  form,  and  a  third  time  deliv- 
ered to  thoughtful  men. 

At  the  request  of  those  who  heard  them,  they 
are  now  offered  to  the  public  in  this  form.     They 


4  PREFA  CE. 

do  not  profess  to  be  an  exhaustive  treatment  of 
the  history  of  Arminianism,  but  to  make  such  a 
fair  and  clear  presentation  as  shall  lead  young 
Methodists  to  a  knowledge  of  what  Arminian- 
ism  is,  what  it  has  had  to  contend  with  in  the 
struggle  for  existence,  why  Methodism  is  Ar- 
minian  and  not  Calviuiau,  a  part  of  the  reason 
why  Methodism  has  had  such  remarkable  moral 
and  spiritual  victories,  and  what  triumphs  there 
are  in  store  for  Arminian  Methodism  as  "Chris- 
tianity in  earnest"  in  the  years  to  corQe? 

GEO.  L.  CURTISS. 
DePauw  University,  1894. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Page. 

What  is  Arminianism, 7 

CHAPTER  II. 
Akminius  as  Professor  at  Ley  den, 32 

CHAPTER  III. 
Arminian  Leaders, 51 

CHAPTER  IV. 
Arminian  Writers, 7S 

CHAPTER  V. 
Doctrinal  Controversies, 93- 

CHAPTER  VI. 
Pre-Wesleyan  Arminianism  in  Europe, 118 

CHAPTER  VII. 
The  Political  Home  of  Arminianism, 13^ 

CHAPTER  VIIL 

Arminianism  in  its  Wesleyan  Growth, 15& 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Scholars  op  Arminianism, 179 

5 


6  INDEX. 

CHAPTER  X. 

Page. 

Arminianism  and  the  Friends, 200 

CHAPTER  XL 

Arminianism  and  Revivals, 209 

Appendix, 221 

Index,   227 


ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 


Chapter  I. 

WHAT  IS   ARMINIANISM? 

Epochs  in  History — Discussions  of  Doctrines  and  Polity — 
Spread  of  Predestinationism — Calvinism,  Aiminianism, 
and  Uuiversalism — A  Particular  Statement  of  Armin- 
ianism — Original  Sin  as  taught  by  Arminius — Armin- 
ianism  not  a  New  Doctrine  as  taught  by  Arminius — 
Augustine  and  Predestination  to  Eternal  Life — Gott- 
■  schalk  and  Foreordination  to  Damnation — James  Armin- 
ius—Birth— Death  of  his  Father — Adopted  by  ^milius — 
At  School  at  Utrecht — Death  of  iEmilius— Adopted  by 
Suellius — At  Marburg  -  Murder  of  his  Mother,  »Sisters, 
and  Brother  at  Oudewater — At  Rotterdam — Sent  to  Ley- 
den — A  Brilliant  Student— Adopted  by  the  Burgomeis- 
ters  of  Amsterdam  —  Sent  to  Geneva — Forms  the  Ac- 
•quaintance  of  Uytenbogaert — Went  to  Basle  and  studied 
for  a  Time — Went  to  Padua — Heard  Zarabella  Visited 
Rome— Called  to  Amsterdam— Examined  bj^  the  Classis — 
-Commenced  Preaching — How  Arminius  came  to  adopt 
the  Doctrine  called  by  his  Name — Koornhert  to  be  re- 
futed— Arminius  chosen  for  the  Task — The  Examination 
led  to  his  Repudiation  of  Predestination — Married — 
Pul)lic  Exposition  of  Romans— Criticism  and  Slander — 
His  Traducers — His  Defense— The  Senators  decide  in 
his  Favor. 

The  distinct  and  vigorous  promulgation  of  im- 
portant doctrines  of  Christianity,  and  their  working 
iike  leaven   among  the  people,  produce  epochs  in 

7 


8  A  RMINIA  NISM  /JV  HIS  TOR  Y. 

history.  This  is  especially  true  if  the  doctriue- 
chance  to  antagonize  some  old  and  favorite  doc- 
trine of  the  Church,  or  some  bi'anch,  and  runs 
counter  to  the  preconceived  notions  of  any  con- 
siderable number  of  men.  The  most  remarkable 
discussions  that  the  world  has  ever  heard,  and 
which  have  produced  the  most  marked  effects  upon 
events  in  history,  both  in  individuals  and  in  na- 
tions, are  those  about  Christian  doctrine  and  Church 
government.  The  best  talent,  the  greatest  learn- 
ing, the  highest  degree  of  enthusiasm,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  the  most  wonderful  endurance  have  been 
brought  into  the  discussions  of  doctrines  and  polity 
in  whatever  age.  If  there  has  been  mingled  in  the 
discussions  of  Christian  doctrine  any  political  ques- 
tion, the  results  have  entirely  changed  the  face  of 
history. 

When  Arminianism  was  promulgated  in  Hol- 
land at  the  Synod  of  Dort,  Calvinism  was  the  dom- 
inant doctrine  regarding  original  sin,  freedom  of 
the  will,  and  God's  decrees  concerning  human  sal- 
vation. For  a  full  thousand  years  it  held  sway 
over  the  masses  of  the  people  under  the  name  of 
Augustinism,  and  when  some  enlightened  ecclesias- 
tics presumed  to  controvert  and  deny  the  truth  of 
the  dogma,  and  proceeded  to  demonstrate  its  fallacy 
from  Scripture  and  logic,  then  arose  agitations  in 
the  Reformed  Church  world  of  so  persistent  a  char- 
acter as  to  affect  schools,  agitate  Churches,  and, 
sometimes,  to  involve  nations.     Such   a  hold  had 


WHA  T  IS  A  RMINIA  NISM ?  » 

this  doctriue  of  the  eternal  decrees  taken  upou 
men  that  they  came  to  question  the  right  of  any 
one  to  doubt  the  truth  of  the  dogmas  of  Calvinism. 
It  had  taken  hold  upon  the  State,  and  stamped  it- 
self upon  the  Government  of  Geneva,  dictated  its 
constitution,  and  enacted  its  laws.  Having  achieved 
this  brilliant  success,  it  reached  out  to  other  Swiss 
States  or  cantons,  to  do  for  them  as  at  Geneva. 
It  crossed  the  sea,  and  took  a  firm  hoM  upon  Scot- 
land, and  so  fastened  itself  upon  her  sturdy  minds 
that  it  held  them  with  the  grasp  of  a  giant,  from 
which  thralldom  the  Scottish  mind  has  not  yet  been 
freed.  In  England,  Calvinism  asserted  itself,  and 
•demanded  the  highest  place,  priding  itself  upon  be- 
ing recognized  as  the  established  doctrine  regarding 
human  salvation.  Intrenched  in  this  fortified  fast- 
ness for  many  years,  it  was  impossible  to  advance 
any  other  claims.  From  England  Calvinism  crossed 
the  Atlantic,  and  intrenched  itself  in  the  sterile  soil 
and  among  the  rugged  rocks  of  New  England,  and 
refused  to  admit  the  preaching  of,  and  belief 
in,  the  doctrine  of  Arminianism,  until  that  unique 
pioneer  of  New  England  Methodism  preached  a  sal- 
vation free  to  the  world  of  men  in  Boston  Common, 
while  standing  upon  a  borrowed  table.  Look  the 
facts  over,  and  see  if  it  is  not  true  that  Episcopacy, 
Independency,  Congregationalism,  and  Presbyte- 
rian ism  were  all  the  professors  of  and  in  the  posses- 
sion of  the  hard  dogmas  of  Calvinism.  East  and 
West,  in  the  Old  World  and  in  the  New,  there  was 


10  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

only  a  slight  foothold  for  the  warmer,  richer,  and 
more  soul-encouraging  doctrines  of  Arminianism, 

In  the  world  are  three  great  doctrinal  systems 
regarding  human  salvation,  known  by  distinctive 
titles ;  namely,  Calvinism,  Arminianism,  and  Uni- 
versalism.  The  kernel  of  each  may  be  stated  in  a 
few  words. 

Calvinism,  among  other  things,  says  that  God  in 
Jesus  Christ  made  provision  for  the  salvation  of 
those  in  the  human  race  who  were  predestinated 
and  foreordained  from  all  eternity  to  be  saved  in 
heaven,  and  the  remainder  are  predestinated  and 
foreordained  from  all  eternity  to  eternal  damnation 
for  the  glory  of  God. 

Arminianism  teaches  that  God  in  Jesus  Christ 
made  provision  fully  for  the  salvation  of  all  those 
who,  by  repentance  towards  God  and  faith  in  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  accept  the  terms,  and  all  who 
do  thus  accept  are  eternally  saved.  All  who  rebel 
against  God,  and  refuse  to  accept  of  Jesus  on  the 
terms  of  proffered  mercy,  sink  under  Divine  wrath, 
and  are  eternally  lost. 

Universalism  teaches  that  God  in  Christ  Jesus 
has  made  such  an  abundant  and  merciful  provision 
for  human  salvation  that  everybody,  irrespective  of 
individual  moral  character,  and  without  repentance 
and  faith  in  a  Savior,  shall  be  saved  in  heaven. 
In  this  doctrine  there  is  no  provision  for  the  pun- 
ishment of  sin  hereafter.  All  punishment  of  sin  is 
in  this  life.     Universalism  has  been  driven  to  such 


WHA  T  IS  A  R  MINI  A  NISM  ?  11 

straits  as  strangely  to  equivocate  in  her  statements 
as  to  how  much  punishment  may  be  given  or  re- 
quired in  this  life,  and  how  much  may  be  given  in 
a  possible  state  of  post-mortem  purgation.  There 
seems  to  be  no  uniform  solid  ground  upon  which 
all  believers  in  the  doctrines  of  Universalism  may 
stand. 

According  to  Calvinism,  there  is  in  man  a  ne- 
cessitated will,  which  can  act  only  in  certain  ways. 
The  will  must  act,  but  it  is  necessitated  to  act  in  a 
certain  way.     Out  of  that  groove  it  can  not  move. 

According  to  Arminianisn,  there  is  a  perfect 
freedom  of  will  regarding  man's  moral  condition 
and  powers.  Man  must  make  his  own  choice  of 
salvation,  or  choose  to  reject.  He  may  will  freely 
to  use  the  means  provided  for  his  salvation,  or  he 
may  as  freely  reject.  In  either  case  he  must  abide 
by  the  results  of  his  free  choice. 

According  to  Universalism,  there  is  no  will  in 
salvation.  Man  is  in  a  condition  of  salvation  with- 
out his  choice.  He  is  in  the  stream,  and  can  not 
do  otherwise  than  go  with  it  into  heaven. 

A  More  Particular  Statement  of  Arminianism. 

What  is  Arminianism  ?  In  the  fewest  words,  it 
is  the  doctrine  that  God,  by  the  sacrificial  oflfering 
of  his  only-begotten  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  has  made 
an  abundant  provision  for  the  salvation  of  all  hu- 
man souls  who  come  unto  him  in  the  prescribed 
manner.     This  provision  is  universal.      Not  a  soul 


12  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIS  TO  R  Y. 

is  left  out  of  the  promise.  Every  soul  that  wills  to 
enter  life  eterual,  by  using  the  means  designated 
may  enter  into  life  eternal,  and  not  die.  All  souls 
who  go  down  to  hell,  go,  not  because  God  has  fore- 
ordained them  to  go  down  to  l)lackuess  and  despair, 
but  because  they  have  willed  to  reject  the  offers  of 
mercy. 

As  to  original  sin,  Arminianism  teaches  that 
man,  descending  from  Adam,  has  become  corrupted 
by  Adam's  sin,  but  is  not  guilty.  Adam  was  both 
guilty  and  corrupted.  No  one  will  be  lost  in  per 
dition  because  of  Adam's  transgression,  but  all  are 
in  the  bondage  of  corruption  because  of  the  sin 
of  the  federal  head.  From  the  crown  of  the  head 
'to  the  sole  of  the  foot  there  is  corruption.  This 
involves  man's  triple  nature — body,  mind,  and 
spirit.  This  corruption  has  so  affected  the  race 
that  no  one  can  return  to  God  by  natural  means. 
His  virtue  is  prostrated,  his  power  largely  paralyzed, 
his  appetite  for  purity  sadly  vitiated,  his  bent  to 
sin  and  folly  established.  But  he  may  will  to  reach 
out  to  proffei-ed  redemption  by  the  blood  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  receive  such  gracious  aid  from  the  Holy 
Spirit,  by  the  exercise  of  faith,  as  to  be  restored  to 
favor  with  God  and  sealed  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

The  system  of  theology  that  teaches  clearly  this 
doctrine  is  called  Arminianism,  because  that  James 
Arrainius  advocated  it  strongly  against  the  Calvin- 
istic  doctrine  in  Holland,  while  his  followers  advo- 
cated it  in  the  Synod  of  Dort. 


WMA  T  IS  A  RMINIA  NISM?  1 3 

Was  this  a  New  Doctrine  with  Arminius? 

No.  "  Before  the  time  of  Augustine  [fourth 
century]  the  unanimous  doctrine  of  the  Church 
Fathers,  so  far  as  scientifically  developed  at  all,  was 
that  the  Divine  decrees  ae  to  the  fate  of  the  indi- 
vidual man  were  conditioned  upon  their  faith  and 
obedience,  as  foreseen  in  the  Divine  Mind.  Augus- 
tine, in  his  controversy  with  Pelagius,  with  a  view 
to  enhance  the  glory  of  grace,  was  the  first  to  teach 
unequivocally  that  the  salvation  of  the  elect  de- 
pends upon  the  bare  will  of  God,  and  that  his  de- 
cree to  save  those  whom  he  chooses  to  save  was  un- 
conditional." 

It  was  left  for  Gottschalk,  in  the  ninth  century, 
to  supply  the  second  part  of  the  doctrine ;  namely, 
that  those  who  are  not  saved  unconditionally  are 
foreordained  to  be  damned,  or  reprobated  to  be  lost. 
Thus  stood  the  doctrine  about  1535,  when  John 
Calvin,  either  at  Geneva  or  at  Strasburg,  united 
the  foreordination  unto  eternal  life  unconditionally 
of  Augustine,  and  the  foreordination  of  the  repro- 
bate to  hell  unconditionally  of  Gottschalk,  and 
sent  them  out  as  the  center  of  his  system  of  Sys- 
tematic Theology  in  the  Christian  Institutes.  The 
doctrine  has  since  that  time  received  the  name  of 
Calvinism. 

There  have  been  some  erroneous  statements 
concerning  Arminianism,  which  must  have  arisen 
from  either  a  willful  perversion  of  the  truth  or  an 
2 


14  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

ignorance  of  it.  Dr.  Archibald  A.  Hodge,  in 
Johnson's  Encyclopedia,  says:  "Between  these 
[that  is,  between  Pelagianisni  and  Calvinism]  comes 
the  manifold  and  elastic  system  of  a  compromise 
known  as  Semi-Pelagianism,  and  in  modern  times 
as  Arminianism."  There  never  was  a  time  when 
Semi-Pelagianism  and  Arminianism  were  synony- 
mous terms.  They  are  now,  and  always  have  been, 
quite  distinct  in  their  definitions  and  teaching.  To 
attempt  to  bring  Arminianism  into  contempt  by 
linking  it  with  Arianism,  Socinianism,  or  with  any 
other  kindred  notion  that  is  recognized  in  the  Chris- 
tian world  as  erroneous,  is  base  in  the  extreme.  It 
is  true  that  some  of  these  sects  have  advocated  one 
or  two  doctrines  as  held  by  Arminius ;  but  that 
does  not  make  them,  by  any  means,  Arminians,  any 
more  than  because  a  few  men  are  criminals,  thei'e- 
fore  all  men  are  criminals.  Arminianism  is  a  sys- 
tem of  its  own,  wholly  distinct  from  Pelagianism, 
Semi-Pelagianism,  Arianism,  Socinianism,  and  all 
other  isms,  and  especially  from  Calvinism. 

When  James  Arminius  taught  the  system  now 
called  by  his  name  he  was  only  restoring  to  the 
world  the  doctrine  as  found  in  the  primitive  Church. 
Calvinism  was  not  the  primitive  apostolical  doctrine 
or  faith.  The  primitive  doctrine  universally  taught 
that  whosoever  willed  to  come  to  the  Father  by  the 
Son  could  do  so,  by  the  way  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
be  eternally  saved.  Man  was  made  with  a  will, 
and  was  free  to  act  in  approach  to  God,  or  free  to 


WITA  T  IS  ARMINIANISMf  15 

refuse  and  go  away  into  despair  and  darkness  and 
eternal  death.  James  Arminius  was  the  rightful 
restorer  of  the  doctrine  as  it  flowed  from  the  lips 
of  the  impetuous  Peter,  the  beloved  John,  the 
sweet-spirited  James,  the  polished  Paul,  and  all  the 
apostles  and  early  Fathers  of  the  Church. 

James  Arminius. 

Who  was  James  Arminius,  and  how  did  he 
come  to  advocate  this  doctrine  ?  With  this  ques- 
tion arises  another  of  some  importance  :  How  did 
the  primitive  doctrine  come  to  be  so  long  obscured, 
and  such  antagonistic  notions  prevail? 

Jacob  Hermannson,  or,  as  sometimes  called, 
simply  Hermann,  was  born  in  the  year  1560  A.  D. , 
at  a  town  in  South  Holland  called  Oude water. 
After  he  began  to  be  a  scholar,  his  name  was  Lat- 
inized into  Jacobus  Arminius,  and  in  the  English 
the  Jacobus  became  James.  His  father's  name 
was  Hermann  Jacobs,  and  his  mother,  Angelica,  a 
woman  of  Dort.  His  father's  occupation  was  that 
of  a  cutler,  holding  a  respectable  position  in  the 
town.  While  James  w'as  yet  an  infant  his  father 
died,  leaving  a  wife  and  three  children.  Jacobus 
was  taken  under  the  care  of  a  former  Romish  priest 
by  the  name  of  Theodorus  ^miliiis.  At  an  early 
age  he  was  sent  to  school  at  Utrecht,  to  which 
place  JEmilius  had  removed.  The  character  of 
-^railius  was  good,  being  now  a  Reformed  clergy- 
man, and   quite   learned,  and   from  him  Arminius 


10  A RMIXIAXISM  IK  HISTORY. 

received  careful  traiuino;.  Theodorus  ^Eiiiilius  was 
"a  man  of"  singular  eruditiou,  who  stood  high  auioug 
his  fellow-towusineu  for  the  gravity  of  his  manners 
and  the  purity  of  his  life."  When  the  youth  was 
fifteen  years  of  age  his  foster-father  died.  At  once 
a  friend,  Rudolph  Snellius,  a  "profound  linguist 
and  most  expert  mathematician,"  took  him  in  charge, 
and  in  1575  removed  to  Marburg  for  the  advan- 
tages of  that  school.  This  was  the  year  when  the 
Spaniards  attacked  and  sacked  Arminius's  native 
town  of  Oudewater,  and  cruelly  murdered  hun- 
dreds of*innocent  people  without  regard  to  sex,  put 
its  garrison  to  the  sword,  and  hanged  its  ministers  of 
religion.  Hearing  of  this  sad  event,  and  fearing 
the  worst,  Arminius  hurried  back  to  find  that  his 
mother,  l)rother,  and  sisters  had  perished  by  the 
hands  of  the  wicked  soldiers,  and  with  them  several 
relatives.  Overlooking  the  blackened  ruins  of  his 
once  beautiful  home,  and  saddened  by  the  hard  con- 
ditions, and  feeling  that  all  ties  that  bound  him 
to  this  spot  had  been  broken,  Arminius  walked  back 
to  Marburg.  Few  can  realize  the  sadness  of  that 
hour  to  this  youth, — fatherless,  motherless,  brother- 
less,  sisterless,  and  homeless,  all  because  of  the 
wicked  persecutions  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  The 
outlook  was  anything  but  bright.  Only  a  myste- 
rious, overruling  Providence  can  now  provide. 

For  some  unexplained  reason  he  went  to  Rotter- 
dam, possibly  because  a  few  remnants  of  his  Oude- 
water friends  had   escaped   there,    and   waited   for 


WHAT  IS  ARMINIANISM?  17 

something  favorable  to  occur  in  their  native  State. 
Peter  Bertius  was  the  pastor  of  a  Reformed  Church 
at  that  place.  He  was  a  large-hearted  and  philan- 
thropic man,  and  as  a  man  of  God  opened  his  home 
and  received  young  Arminius  into  his  family. 
Peter  Bertius  sent  young  Arminius,  with  his  son 
Peter,  to  the  University  of  Leydeu,  Avhich  had  just 
been  founded  by  William,  Prince  of  Orange.  Ar- 
minius was  fortunate  in  his  teachers  at  Leyden. 
Beside  Peter  Bertius,  Sen.,  was  John  TafRn,  Wal- 
loon minister  and  counselor  of  the  Prince  of 
Orange,  Lambert  Danaius,  a  master  of  varied 
erudition,  "  versed  at  once  in  philosophical  and 
theological  studies,"  and  John  Dousa,  a  poet  of  no 
mean  character.  "Arminius,"  says  Brandt,  "soon 
made  such  proficiency  that  he  far  outstripped  his 
fellow-students.  .  .  .  There  was  scarcely  a  field 
of  study  or  department  of  the  arts  which  he  did  not 
bound  over  with  eager  and  joyous  impulse."  Here 
he  remained  six  years.  The  brilliancy  and  attain- 
ments of  the  youth  attracted  the  attention  of  the 
"Directors  of  the  Merchants  of  the  City  of  Amster- 
dam," a  body  of  wealthy  and  noble-hearted  men  of 
strong  faith,  and  concerned  in  the  government  of 
the  city.  It  was  agreed  that  they  should  furnish 
all  the  money  necessary  to  defray  his  expenses  while 
being  educated  for  the  ministry,  on  conditions  which 
he  accepted.  On  accepting  this  generous  offer,  Ar- 
minius agreed  that  "after  he  had  been  ordained  he 
would  not  serve  in  the  Church  of  any  other  city 


18  -    ARMIKIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

without    the   permission    of   the     burgomeisters    of 
Amsterdam," 

Having  accepted  the  agreement  for  material 
aid,  in  lo82  Armiuius  went  to  Geneva  to  study 
theology,  and  fully  })repare  himself  for  the  work  of 
the  Church.  Geneva  was  at  that  time  the  center 
of  the  Reformed  Church.  The  school  stood  at  the 
head,  and  was  justly  celebrated  all  over  the  Chris- 
tian w^orld.  The  doctrines  clustering  around  un- 
conditional predestination  as  taught  by  John  Cal- 
vin, were  taught  and  enforced  with  the  iutensest 
rigor,  aTul  their  form  was  unchanged  by  Theodore 
Beza,  who,  if  possible,  was  a  stronger  predestina- 
tionist  than  C'alvin.  Armiuius  had  a  profound  ad- 
miration for  Beza.  "  With  the  utmost  gravity  of 
manners,  this  theologian  excelled  his  compeers  in 
persuasiveness  of  address  and  in  })romptitude  and 
perspicuity  of  utterance,  while  his  learning  and 
attainments  in  sacred  literature  were  profound  and 
extraordinary.  With  ears  intent  Arminius  drank 
in  his  words ;  with  eager  assiduity  he  hung  upon 
his  lips;  and  with  intense  admiration  he  listened  to 
his  exposition  of  the  ninth  chapter  of  Paul's  Epistle 
to  the  Romans."  (Brandt,  p.  44.)  The  progress 
made  by  Armiuius  was  great.  His  mind  moved 
and  worked  strongly  and  rapidly.  He  stood  among 
the  first  students  at  Geneva. 

While  at  Geneva,  he  met  with  a  student  from 
Holland,  and  of  the  university  of  XUrecht,  who 
never   Latinized  his  extravagantly  long   and  hard 


WHA  T  IS  A  EMI  NT  A  NISM?  19 

uarue,  Uytenbogaert,  a  man  of  no  mean  ability  and 
culture.  Their  friendship  was  life-long,  and  when 
the  time  was  ripe  for  it,  Uytenbogaert  became  one 
of  the  stauchest  advocates  of  the  doctrines  promul- 
gated by  Arminius.  While  at  Geneva,  Arminius 
began  to  lecture  as  well  as  study.  He  sharply  at- 
tacked the  philosophy  of  Aristotle,  giving  offense 
to  some  of  the  professors  by  defending  Ramus  and 
his  system  of  dialectics  in  opposition  to  that  of  the 
old  Greek  philosopher.  Great  opposition  was  raised 
to  his  remaining  at  Geneva,  and  soon  he  visited 
Basle,  and  entered  the  university  and  began  his 
studies.  So  proficient  was  Arminius  in  his  lectur- 
ing and  studies,  that  the  faculty  of  theology  offered 
to  confer  on  him  the  Doctor's  degree  gratis.  Strange 
to  say,  this  rising  young  star  among  theologians  de- 
clined the  honor,  alleging  as  a  reason  that  he  was 
too  young  a  man  to  receive  such  a  grave  degree. 

In  1588,  Arminius  returned  to  Geneva,  where 
the  storm  raised  against  him  had  measurably  blown 
over,  and  he  remained  three  years  longer  in  the 
study  of  theology.  His  mind  was  permeated  with 
the  doctrines  of  John  Calvin,  and  he  did  not  to  the 
public  seem  to  have  any  doubts  regarding  their 
truth.  Yet  we  have  no  means  of  knowing  that  he 
at  any  time  strongly  advocated  them. 

In  1586,  Arminius  was  attracted  to  Padua, 
Italy,  to  hear  the  celebrated  professor  of  philos- 
ophy, Zarabella.  His  mind  was  not  greatly  im- 
pressed with  this  master,  and  he  tarried  with  him 


20  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

but  a  short  time,  and  then  visited  Rome  and  other 
places  in  Italy.  lu  a  few  months  lie  returned  to 
Geneva  to  continue  his  studies.  The  l)urgomeisters 
of  Amsterdam,  hearing  of  this  journey  to  Rome, 
which  he  undertook  without  their  consent  or 
knowledge,  ordered  his  immediate  return  to  Am- 
sterdam. This  they  claimed  the  right  to  do,  be- 
cause they  were  furnishing  the  money  for  his 
education,  and  he  was  practically  their  servant, 
bound  to  them  in  body  and  mind  for  a  lifetime. 
He  was  accused  by  some  enemies  of  having  "  kissed 
the  Pope's  slipper,"  which  meant  that  he  had  l)e- 
come  a  Roman  Catholic.  He  promptly  denied  this 
charge,  and  proved  it  a  false  accusation  by  a  travel- 
ing companion,  and  that  he  was  as  genuine  a  re- 
former as  any  who  remained  at  Geneva  or  Amster- 
dam. On  leaving  Geneva  in  the  autumn  of  1587, 
he  received  and  bore  away  a  high  testimonial  from 
his  teachers.  *  In  it  occurred  this  sentence:  "His 
mind  was  in  the  highest  degree  qualified  for  the 
discharge  of  duty,  should  it  please  God  at  any  time 
to  use  his  ministry  for  the  promotion  of  his  own 
work  in  the  Church."     (Brandt,  p.  53.) 

This  matter  having  been  settled,  he  was  or- 
dained in  the  Reformed  Church  in  1588.  His  ex- 
amination took  place  before  the  Amsterdam  Classis, 
and  by  the  request  of  the  authorities  of  the  Church, 
he  began  his  ministry  in  that  city  in  officiating 
each  week  at  the  "  evening  services."  He  delivered 
a  discourse  and  conducted  the  prayers.     This  com- 


WHAT  IS  ARMINIANISMf  21 

menced  ou  the  4th  of  February.  He  soon  attracted 
such  attention  by  his  "style  of  speaking,"  which 
was  "  marked  by  a  certain  sweet  and  native  grace, 
tempered  with  gravity,"  that  by  the  action  of  the 
Consistory  he  was  jDhiced  in  charge  of  the  Church 
in  Amsterdam.  His  church  was  soon  crowded  with 
earnest  worshipers.  His  great  soul  was  on  fire  for 
the  saving  and  reformation  of  Amsterdam.  The 
spirit  of  a  real  religious  reformation  burned  within 
his  breast,  and  he  preached  righteousness  and  true 
holiness  with  an  unusual  unction.  Arminius  was 
now  in  the  twenty-eighth  year  of  his  age.  "His 
discourses,"  says  Brandt,  "were  masculine  and 
erudite ;  everything  he  uttered  breathed  the  the- 
ologian— not  raw  and  commonplace,  but  superior, 
acute,  cultivated,  and  replete  with  solid  acquisitions 
both  in  human  and  in  sacred  literature.  This  made 
him  such  a  favorite  both  with  high  and  low,  that 
in  a  short  time  he  attracted  towards  himself  the 
ears  and  the  hearts  of  all  classes  alike.  In  the  gen- 
eral admiration  of  his  talents,  some  styled  him  '  a 
file  of  truth;'  others,  'a  whetstone  of  intellect;' 
others,  'a  pruning  knife  for  rank  growdng  errors;' 
and,  indeed,  on  the  subject  of  religion  and  sacred 
study,  it  seemed  as  if  scarcely  anything  was  known 
Avhich  Arminius  did  not  know."  (Brandt,  p.  57.) 
Of  his  visit  to  Rome  Arminius  often  said  that 
it  was  of  great  benefit  to  him,  for  he  "  saw  at  Rome 
a  mystery  of  iniquity  more  foul  than  he  had  ever 
mentioned."     He  saw  some  of  the  things  that  had 


22  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

stirred  the  heart  of  Luther,  and  led  to  a  revolt  from 
the  thralldom  of  the  Seven-hilled  City- 
How  DID    ArMINIUS  come  TO  ADOPT   THE   ThEORY 
OPPOSED      TO     THE       LoNG-ESTABLISHED     DOC- 
TRINES OF  Calvinism  ? 

Melanchthon  in  Germany  held  very  mild  opin- 
ions in  regard  to  predestination.  He  would  not 
accept  or  teach  the  strong  doctrine  as  taught  by 
Augustine  or  Gottschalk,  but  taught  it  in  a  manner 
that  took  away  almost  the  whole  of  the  really  ob- 
jectionable. These  notions  were  known  in  Ger- 
many, and  spread  through  Holland  even  earlier 
than  the  doctrines  of  Calvin,  and  found  genuine 
advocates  and  followers.  At  Amsterdam,  in  1589, 
a  citizen,  Richard  Koornhert,  "published  several 
works  in  which  he  attacked  the  doctrine  of  pre- 
destination which  was  taught  by  Beza  and  the 
Genevan  school."  Koornhert's  arguments  were  so 
fully  fortified,  and  so  sharply  put,  that  the  Hol- 
land theologians  were  not  able  to  put  them  aside  or 
show  their  falsity.  The  Dutch  mind,  ordinarily  slow 
to  act,  now  moved  quite  swiftly,  and  the  doctrines 
of  Koornhert  were  likely  to  become  universal.  To 
counteract  these  teachings,  and  at  the  same  time 
help  to  remove  some  of  the  more  objectionable 
things  in  Calvinism,  a  change  or  modification  of 
the  doctrines  of  Calvin  as  taught  by  Beza,  was 
proposed  by  certain  ministers  about  Amsterdam. 

Some  of  the  ministers  of  Delft  considered  this 


WHAT  IS  ARMINIANISM?  23 

teaching  of  Kooruhert  iucendiary  and  deptruc- 
tive,  while  others  became  convinced  that  Beza 
was  possibly  in  error  to  some  extent  in  his  pres- 
entation of  the  doctrine  of  predestination.  The 
Dutch  mind  was  confused  as  to  its  theology  as  most 
of  them  received  it.  While  ' '  they  agreed,  with  Beza, 
that  Divine  predestination  was  the  antecedent  un- 
conditional and  immutable  decree  of  God  concern- 
ing salvation  and  damnation  of  each  individual," 
yet  they  could  not  agree  with  Beza  that  man,  con- 
sidered before  he  was  created,  was  made  the  object 
of  unconditional  salvation  or  reprobation.  The 
Delft  ministers  were  not  all  of  them  advocates  of 
supralapsarian  predestination  and  reprobation,  but 
held  to  sublapsarian  election ;  and  this  blast  of 
Koornhert  did  not  allay  the  excitement. 

The  objection  of  Koornhert  to  Calvinism  was 
that  the  "doctrine  of  absolute  decrees  represented 
God  as  the  author  of  sin,  as  such  decrees  made  sin 
necessary  and  inevitable  no  less  than  damnation." 
The  view  he  published  in  a  book  called  "  Responsio 
ad  Argumenta  Bezie  et  Calvimv,"  etc.  The  book 
was  reckoned  heterodoxical  and  dangerous  by  the 
theologians  of  Delft.  It  savored  too  much  of  free 
thought  and  liberal  interpretation  of  God's  plans. 
It  seemed  to  bring  man  into  too  familiar  and  easy 
intercourse  with  God.  The  book  must  be  answered 
or  refuted. 

Koornhert  was  Secretary  of  State  of  Holland — 
a  man  of  learning,  who  looked  into  philosophy  and 


24  A  RMIXIA  NISM  JX  JUS  TOR  Y. 

religiou  with  the  eyes  of  a  hiymau.  He  attacked 
Romanists,  Lutherans,  and  Calviuists  alike,  and 
brwight  forward  an  array  of  autagouisius  not  easily 
answered.  ' '  He  maintained  that  every  religious  com- 
munion needed  reformation,  but  he  said  that  no  one 
had  a  right  to  engage  in  it  without  a  mission  sup- 
ported by  miracles."  The  Calviuists  of  Holland, 
more  than  Romanists  or  I^utherans,  took  umbrage 
at  his  treatment  of  jn-edesti nation,  and  demanded 
its  answer.  The  task  of  formulating  a  proper  and 
convincing  answer  was  assigned  toLydius,  a  profes- 
sor at  Franeker.  He  besought  Arminius  to  make 
the  answer,  to  which  the  Amsterdam,  scholar  and 
minister  consented. 

When  Arminius  commenced  the  task  of  exam- 
ining the  book  of  Kooruhert,  he  went  about  it  like 
a  thoroughly  conscientious  man,  honest  in  purpose 
and  devoid  of  desire  to  deceive  or  be  deceived. 
Arminius  began  at  the  foundation  and  traversed 
the  entire  theme  of  Koornhert,  patiently  going  over 
the  arguments  and  counter-arguments,  the  illustra- 
tions and  Scriptures,  weighing  them  as  to  their  value 
and  force,  until  his  own  mind  was  filled  with  doubt 
as  to  the  truth  of  Calvinism.  How  long  before  he 
adopted  the  primitive  doctrine  and  forsook  Calvin- 
ism can  not  be  determined.  His  sermons  at  Am- 
sterdam very  soon  began  to  have  the  flavor  of  the 
freedom  of  the  will  in  matters  of  salvation,  in  op- 
position to  the  dogma  of  a  necessitated  will,  and 
that  whoever  wills  to  come  to  God  by  Jesus  ('hrist 


WHA  T  IS  A  RMINIA  NISMf  25 

may  come  and  be  made  free.  For  about  two  years 
this  clear,  forcible,  primitive  preaching  continued. 
It  called  forth  many  questions  and  frequent  discus- 
sions between  himself  and  the  Calvinists.  In  1593 
his  lectures  on  Romans  ix  were  published.  He,  in 
these,  quite  sharply  disputed  the  teachings  of  the 
Genevan  school.  A  party  was  formed  against  him  ; 
disputes  and  contentions  ran  high.  Staid  old  Am- 
sterdam and  her  burghers  were  for  once  theolog- 
ically stirred  from  center  to  circumference.  It  was 
soon  discovered  that  Arminius  was  a  disputant  not 
easily  handled.  His  steel  was  sharp,  his  arguments 
pointed,  and  his  wit  keen.  It  was  agreed  that  be- 
tween all  parties  for  the  time  there  should  be  a 
truce.     It  was  not  rigidly  maintained. 

The  mental  and  spiritual  exercises  of  Arminius 
in  coming  out  from  the  mysticism  and  bondage  of 
doubt  under  the  doctrine  of  predestination  and  a 
necessitated  will  into  the  clear  light  and  mental 
freedom  of  the  doctrine  as  taught  by  the  early 
Fathers  of  the  Church,  is  a  story  of  interest,  for  it 
is  one  of  victory.  About  this  time  he  took  for  a 
Avife  Elizabeth  Real,  "a  woman  of  elegant  manners 
and  a  great  mind."  She  was  the  daughter  of  one 
of  Amsterdam's  greatest  judges  and  senators,  and 
one  who  had  most  actively  defended  his  city 
and  country  against  the  unmitigated  tyranny  and 
cruelty  of  the  Spaniards.  She  proved  to  be  "en- 
dowed and  adorned  with  hereditary  virtues,  most 
exemplary   manners,    and   the    love  of   unaffected 


26  ARMINIANISM  IN  BISTORT. 

piety" — just  such  a  life  as  encouraged  and  stimu- 
lated the  mind  and  heart  of  Arminius  to  study  and 
teach  what  his  conscience  told  him  was  the  mind 
of  God. 

Finding  so  much  antagonism  arising  against  his 
teaching  of  salvation  provided  for  all  men  and  the 
possibility  of  all  men  accepting  by  faith  and  re- 
ceiving pardon  of  sin,  Arminius  set  a  watch  over 
his  lips,  and  continued  his  studies  carefully  and 
persistently.  He  saw  the  carnal  bondage  of  many 
of  his  Church,  and  how  they  needed  enlightenment 
regarding  the  nature  and  bondage  of  sin,  together 
with  a  freeing  of  their  minds  from  "-vicious  and 
distorted  interpretations"  of  "several  passages  of 
Holy  Writ  on  which,  not  infrequently,  as  an  axi- 
omatic basis,  were  reared  carnal  views  at  variance 
with  genuine  Christianity." 

Not  long  after,  he  made  a  public  exposition  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  When  he  came  to  the 
words,  "  For  we  know  that  the  law  is  spiritual,  but 
I  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin,"  he  clearly  set  forth 
his  views.  "His  opinion  was,"  says  Brandt,  "that 
to  interpret  this  passage  as  many  do,  of  the  man  as 
truly  and  thoroughly  born  again  through  gospel 
grace,  was  to  do  the  utmost  to  invalidate  the  efficacy 
of  Christian  regeneration  and  the  cultivation  of 
genuine  piety;  inasmuch  as  the  entire  exercise  of 
Divine  worship,  all  evangelical  obedience,  and  that 
new  creation  which  the  inspired  writers  so  often  and 
so  earnestly  inculcate,  were  thereby  shrunk  within 


WHA  T  IS  A  RMINIA  NISM  ?  27 

such  narrow  limits  as  to  consist,  not  in  the  effect,  but 
simply  in  the  wish.  Wherefore,  after  accurately 
weighing  in  his  own  mind  the  train  of  thought  in 
that  chapter,  and  calling  to  his  aid  the  commenta- 
ries of  Bucer  and  others  upon  it,  he  publicly  taught 
and  maintained  that  St.  Paul  in  this  place  does  not 
speak  of  himself  as  what  he  then  was,  nor  yet  of  a 
man  living  under  the  influence  of  gospel  grace,  but 
personates  a  man  lying  under  the  law,  on  whom  the 
Mosaic  law  had  performed  its  functions,  and  who, 
in  consequence,  being  by  the  aid  of  the  Spirit  con- 
trite on  account  of  sin,  and  convinced  of  the  impo- 
tence of  the  law  as  a  means  of  obviating  salvation, 
was  in  quest  of  a  deliverer,  and  was  not  regener- 
ated indeed,  but  in  the  stage  next  to  regeneration." 
(Brandt,  pp.  66,  67.) 

It  was  not  many  days  after  this  discourse  before 
the  tongue  of  criticism  and  slander  wagged  against 
Arminius.  He  was  charged  with  being  a  Pelagian  ; 
for  "he  ascribed  too  much  goodness  to  an  unregen- 
erate  man."  Others  said  he  was  an  heretical  teacher, 
a  Socinian  ;  he  taught  directly  opposed  to  the  Bel- 
gic  Confession  ;  he  held  contrary  to  the  Palatine 
Catechism  ;  and  he  had  perverted  the  Fathers,  for 
he  appealed  to  their  teachings  to  confirm  his.  The 
public  mind  of  Amsterdam  was  soon  again  seething 
and  boiling  at  a  furious  stage.  It  seemed  as  if 
nothing  would  satisfy  some  minds  but  the  destruc- 
tion of  Arminius.  The  calmness  of  this  true  re- 
former was  most  admirable.     The   Classical  Court 


28  A RMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

ordered  him  before  them  to  give  "satisfactory  ex- 
phioation  of  his  opinion."  Arminius  consented  to 
appear,  provided  it  was  in  the  presence  of  the  rul- 
ers of  the  city,  or  their  delegates,  or  before  his 
brethren  in  the  ministry,  the  elders  being  absent. 
It  was  arranged  that  he  should  appear  before  the 
ministers.  After  much  and  earnest  prayer,  he  ap- 
peared, and  Peter  Plaucius  became  the  advocate 
against  him.  Many  things  charged  against  him, 
Arminius  proved  he  had  never  uttered  from  the 
pulpit;  and  others  had  been  entirely  perverted  to 
an  opposite  meaning  from  what  he  meant.  When 
they  charged  him  with  Pelagianism,-  he  denied  it, 
and  "  contended  that  by  no  legitimate  process  could 
they  be  elicited  from  his  exposition  in  question,  but, 
on  the  contrary,  were  manifestly  repugnant  to  it." 
Arminius  showed  that  he  had  correctly  quoted  from 
and  interpreted  the  writings  of  the  ancient  divines, 
or  Fathers,  and  that  Bucer  and  Erasmus,  of  modern 
times,  agreed  with  his  interpretations  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans.  Regarding  the  charge  that  he 
taught  contrary  to  the  Catechism  and  Confession, 
he  took  ample  time  to  show  that  he  "had  taught 
nothing  whatever  contrary  to  these  formularies  of 
mutual  consent,  and  that  his  doctrine  on  the  point 
in  question  could  be  easily  reconciled  with  them." 
(Brandt,  pp.  69-70.)  Rising  to  a  consciousness 
that  he  had  certain  mental  and  spiritual  rights,  he 
declared  that  "  he  was  in  no  respect  bound  to  every 
private   interpretation   of  the    Reformed,   but   was 


WJfA  T  IS  A  RMINIA  NISM.  29 

plainly  free,  and  entitled  to  expound  the  heavenly 
oi-acles  and  particular  passages  of  the  sacred  vol- 
ume according  to  the  dictates  of  conscience  ;  and 
that,  in  so  doing,  he  would  ever  be  on  his  guard 
against  advancing  aught  which  tends  to  tear  up  the 
foundation  of  the  Christian  faith."  (IbuL,  p.  70.) 
While  by  the  majority  Armiuius  was  cleared  of 
all  guilt  under  these  charges,  still  there  were  in- 
dividuals who  clamored  for  his  arrest  and  deposi- 
tion, and  sought  by  every  means  to  detract  from  his 
greatness,  his  innocence,  and  his  usefulness.  Chief 
among  these  traducers  was  this  same  Peter  Plaucius. 
He  was  not  satisfied  with  traducing  the  character  of 
the  minister  in  Amsterdam,  but  at  The  Hague  and 
elsewhere.  M.  Lydius  and  XTytenbogaert  went  to 
Amsterdam  in  the  fond  hope  of  settling  matters, 
and  restoring  harmony,  but  all  to  no  purpose.  At 
last  the  matter  was  brought  before  the  new  sena- 
tors, who  invited  the  retiring  senators  to  sit  with 
them,  and  they  determined  to  hear  the  charges  of 
Plaucius  and  others,  and  Arminius's  answer.  The 
senators,  the  11th  of  February,  heard  the  case. 
After  the  charges  liad  been  presented  and  advo- 
cated fully,  Arminius  was  permitted  to  speak  in 
his  own  behalf.  This  he  did  in  his  own  masterly 
manner.  He  took  up  the  charges  item  by  item, 
and  showed  clearly  that  what  he  taught  was  not 
against  the  Catechism  or  Belgic  Confession,  but 
in  harmony  with  them  in  his  interpretation  of 
Romans  vii.  What  seemed  to  be  at  variance  was 
3 


30  ARMINIANISM  IN  niSTORY. 

not  with  the  authorized  standards,  but  the  inter- 
pretations of  some  divines.  He  entered  a  strong 
plea  for  freedom  of  conscience  in  Scripture  inter- 
pretation. He  said  "he  had  not  entertained  a 
doubt  that  it  wouhl  be  free  to  him,  in  the  exercise 
of  that  liberty,  to  discuss  sacred  subjects  which  be- 
long to  all  Christians  and  Christian  teachers  what- 
soever, to  expound  this  or  that  passage  of  Scripture 
according  to  the  dictates  of  conscience.  Further, 
since  the  hinge  of  the  existing  difference  turned 
mainly  on  this  point,  that  some  thought  his  opinion 
of  that  passage  opposed  to  the  received  ecclesiastical 
formularies,  and  that  this  was  a  charge  of  which  he 
could  be  easily  convicted,  he,  for  his  part,  held  him- 
self in  readiness,  for  the  vindication  of  his  name,  to 
enter  into  a  conference  with  his  compeers;  but  he 
earnestly  entreated  that  such  conference  should 
take  place  in  the  presence  of  the  senators  them- 
selves, or  their  delegates;  for  he  anticipated  that 
the  issue  of  this  case  would  be  more  satisfactory 
were  these  influential  men  to  be  present,  not  as 
witnesses  merely,  but  as  moderators  and  righteous 
arbiters  in  respect  to  all  thaf  might  be  advanced  on 
either  side."     (Brandt,  pp.  83-84. ) 

As  soon  as  his  assailants  could  get  the  floor,  they 
demanded  that  the  conference  or  discussion  be  held 
in  the  presence  of  the  Classis,  and  not  before  the 
senators.  But  the  honorable  senators  took  occasion 
to  order  all  the  ministers  to  retire,  after  which  they 
deliberated  as  to  the  merits  of  the  charges  against 


WIT  A  T  IS  ARMINIANISM.  31 

Arminius,  the  manner  in  which  they  were  advo- 
cated, and  the  gentle,  learned,  and  logical  reply  of 
Arminiu8.  The  unanimous  decision  of  the  senators 
was  presented  by  their  president: — "That  it  was 
the  opinion  and  decree  of  the  honorable  senators 
that  the  Church  Court  should  allow  this  whole  mat- 
ter to  rest,  and  permit  whatever  discussions  had 
arisen  out  of  it  up  to  this  time  to  be  consigned  to 
oblivion.  A  fresh  conference  upon  it  did  not  appear 
to  them  to  be  suitable,  or  likely  to  do  good.  They 
(the  ministers)  must  henceforth  be  on  their  guard, 
lest  any  of  them  should  give  vent  to  new  doctrines 
from  the  pulpit.  Should  any  of  them  have  opinions 
in  which  they  differed  from  other  divines,  and  on 
which  they  boasted  a  profounder  knowledge,  it 
would  be  incumbent  on  them  to  reserve  these  to 
themselves,  and  to  talk  them  over  in  a  friendly 
manner  with  their  compeers.  Meanwhile,  those 
who  think  differently,  and  who  can  not  be  con- 
vinced of  error,  must  be  calmly  foreborne  with 
until  the  points  in  dispute  be  decided  by  the 
authority  of  some  council." 

Having  rendered  this  decision,  two  of  the  sen- 
ators added  a  "very  grave  and  serious  admoni- 
tion, ...  to  cultivate  that  fraternal  harmony 
and  peace  by  which  they  were  wont  to  be  dis- 
tinguished."    (Brandt,  p.  85.) 

Thus  this  great  thinker,  eminent  scholar,  and 
devout  Christian,  Armiuius,  was  again  vindicated. 


Chapter  II. 

ARMINIUS  AS  PROFEvSSOR  AT  LKYDEN. 

Pestilence  in  Holland — Death  of  Jnnins,  a  I'lolessor  of  Di- 
vinity at  Leyden — James  Arminins  proposed  for  tj[u' 
Vacancy — The  Opposition  of  (ioniarns — His  Address  to 
tlie  Curators — They  determined  to  have  Arminins— Not 
inclined  to  accept — The  Objections  at  Amsterdam  over- 
come— Keleased — Elected— Examined  for  the  Doctor- 
ate— Success — His  Oration  on  the  Occasion — His  Ora- 
tions on  taking  his  Chair — Effect  upon  the  Students— 
Enemies- Said  that  J'redestination  made  (!od  the  Au- 
thor of  Sin — Made  Rector  Magnific—Hominius— Follow- 
ers of  Arminins  accused  of  his  Crimes — Excitement 
spread  to  Other  Ecclesiastical  Bodies — Address  on  hMght- 
eousness  and  Divine  Providence— Two  Significant  Facts ; 
1st.  People  misquoted  and  perverted  his  Meaning;  '2d. 
He  never  fViiled  to  meet  any  Disputant  on  the  Ques- 
tions of  Doctrine — Question  of  a  National  Synod — Ar- 
minius's  Oration — Why  a  National  Synod  had  not 
been  convened — A  Synod  ordered  by  the  States  (ien- 
eral— Controversy  as  to  Revision — A  Synod  of  South 
Holland  at  Oorcum — Call  made  upon  the  I^eyden  I'ro- 
I'essors  as  to  the  Belgic  Confession  and  Palatinate  Cate- 
chism— Opportunity  for  Arminins  to  speak  of  the  Con- 
fession— Petition  for  a  Preliminary  Synod  at  The 
Hague— Arminius's  Letter  to  Hypi)()litus — Apology  - 
Declaration  of  Sentiments  at  The  Hague — The  Misfor- 
tune of  his  Death — His  Motto — Crotius's  Kemark  con* 
cerning  Arminins. 

A  PESTILENCE  raged  in  Holland,  and  tlic  chair 
of  Divinity  in  the  University  of  Leyden  was  made 
vacant  by  the  death  of  Francis  Junins  in  1002. 
32 


ABMIXIUS  AS  PHOFESSOE  AT  LEYDEN.      33 

The  curators  of  the  uuiversity  were  favorably  im- 
pressed with  James  Arininius,  from  what  they  had 
learued  of  his  ability,  aud  selected  him  as  their 
candidate  for  the  successor.  AVheu  the  chair  was 
tendered  to  Arminius  he  felt  himself  under  obliga- 
tions to  the  Church  at  Amsterdam,  because  of  their 
having  furnished  the  money  for  his  education,  and 
reported  the  case  to  them.  The  burghers  of  Am- 
sterdam were  unwilling  to  release  him  from  his 
pulpit ;  but  Uytenbogaert,  who  at  this  time  was 
minister  at  The  Hague  and  chaplain  to  Maurice, 
Prince  of  Orange,  succeeded  in  obtaining  his  re- 
lease from  his  contract  with  the  men  of  Amsterdam. 
There  were  many  of  the  Calvinistic  ministers 
who  were  opposed  to  Arminius  becoming  professor  of 
Divinity  at  Leyden,  because  of  his  well-known 
anti-Calvinistic  notions.  Among  these  was  Profes- 
sor Gomarus,  one  of  the  Divinity  professors  at 
Leyden,  who  to  the  end  of  his  life  continued  to 
antagonize  Arminius.  Gomarus  was  a  man  of  cul- 
ture and  influence,  but  was  the  embodiment  of 
strong  prejudices.  He  had  been  appointed  by  the 
curators  of  the  Leyden  Academy  to  deliver  the 
funeral  oration  in  honor  of  Junius.  When  the 
curators  were  in  session,  Gomarus  went  into  their 
presence  to  report  his  discharge  of  the  duty  im- 
posed upon  him  and  present  them  with  a  copy  of 
his  oration.  He  took  occasion  to  speak  against 
James  Arminius,  who  he  had  heard  was  their  can- 
didate for  a  successor  of  Junius.     He  gave  them  to 


34  ARMINIAXISM  IN  HISTORY, 

understand  that  to  himself  Arminius  was  very  of- 
fensive ;  that  Junius,  while  living,  "had  no  favoi*- 
able  opinion  of  Artuinius."  In  Amsterdam  "  he 
had  it  in  his  power  to  infect  one  Church  only,  but 
here  he  could  infect  many,  not  only  in  this  but  in 
other  lands."  He  accused  Arminius  of  self-seeking, 
"but  no  faith  was  to  be  attached  to  his  woi'ds." 
The  effect  of  this  speech  was  rather  to  lead  some  to 
sympathy  with  Arminius ;  for  when  Gomarus  was 
asked  if  he  knew  Arminius,  he  was  compelled  to 
say  "he  only  saluted  him  once,  as  he  descried  him 
at  a  little  distance."  When  questioned  as  to  how 
he  knew  about  the  peculiar  teachings -of  Arminius, 
he  said  he  had  it  "from  ministers  most  worthy  of 
credit. "  When  pressed  for  the  names  of  those  min- 
isters he  could  only  name  Plaucius. 

These  curators  put  but  little  confidence  in  the 
address  of  Gomarus,  or  reference  to  Plaucius,  but 
set  about  finding  out  for  themselves  as  to  their  ac- 
cusations. They  called  into  their  council  John 
Van  Olden  Barueveldt,  who  advised  them  to  consult 
ITytenbogaert.  After  a  careful  and  searching  ex- 
amination, they  found  James  Arminius  an  innocent 
man,  and  all  they  could  desire  as  the  successor  of 
Junius. 

When  the  proposition  of  the  curators  was  pre- 
sented to  Arminius,  he  promptly  dissented  from 
their  choice.  He  questioned  his  own  ability,  the 
willingness  of  the  senators  of  Amsterdaili  to  release 
him,  and   the  consent  of  his  enemies  to  allow  him 


ARMINIUS  AS  PEOFESSOR  AT  LEYDEN.      35 

to  take  the  honorable  chair.  Some  great  names 
were  arrayed  against  Arminius,  while  as  equally 
famous  men  stood  for  his  election.  There  were 
sharp  discussions  on  both  sides.  Gomarus  led  the 
party  against  Arminius,  while  Uytenbogaert  led  the 
party  for  him.  The  sermons,  addresses,  letters,  and 
conversations  of  Arminius  were  read,  criticised,  dis- 
cussed, condemned,  and  praised.  The  curators  pa- 
tiently heard  all  that  was  said.  Not  once  was 
Arminius  before  them.  He  was  informed  of  all 
the  proceedings ;  he  was  not  flustered,  angered,  or 
discouraged,  but  left  all  in  the  hands  of  Providence, 
knowing  that  he  had  not  done  or  said  anything 
worthy  of  such  condemnation.  Calmly  he  waited 
the  issue.  His  dear  friend,  Uytenbogaert,  wrote 
him  these  consoling  words  :  "I  would  have  you  be 
of  good  cheer.  .  .  .  The  Lord  God  will  pro- 
vide, and  grant  that  success  which  he  knows  will 
be  most  conducive  to  his  own  glory  and  the  edifi- 
cation of  the  Church,  yea,  more,  and  to  the  salva- 
tion of  me  and  mine.  On  him  I  cast  all  my  care. 
He  will  bring  forth  my  righteousness  as  the  light, 
and  my  judgment  as  the  noonday."  (Brandt,  l(i2. ) 
Every  step  of  the  way  to  the  professorship  at 
Leyden,  Arminius  was  stopped  by  objections,  ques- 
tions of  doctrine,  suspicions,  attacks  of  enemies, — 
led  mostly  by  Gomarus.  At  last  all  seemed  cleared 
away.  The  curators  said  "that  the  suspicions 
stirred  against  Arminius  had  not  been  svibstan- 
tiated,  nor  was  there  just  cause  why  any  one  should 


36  ABMIXTANISM  IX  HISTORY. 

judge  unfavorably  rct>pecting  him  ;  for  iu  the  ex- 
ercise of  liberty  granted  him  of  proi)he.syiug  [of 
discussing  sacred  things]  in  the  Church,  he  had 
taught  nothing  that  was  inimical  to  the  Christian 
religion."     (Brandt,  i)[).  171),  180.J 

Having  been  called  and  elected  to  the  profes- 
sorship, the  next  step  was  to  be  made  a  doctor,  and 
invested  with  the  office.  On  the  19th  of  June,  he 
was  examined  by  Goniarus  before  Grotius  and 
Merula.  All  expressed  themselves  as  fully  satis- 
fied with  the  examination.  On  the  lOth  of  July, 
Armiuius  held  a  disputation  on  the  subject  "Con- 
cerning the  Nature  of  God."  His  opponents  were 
Peter  Bertjus,  Hominius,  Crucius,  and  Greviuchov- 
ius.  He  held  his  place  against  them  in  a  manner 
to  gain  "  universal  applause."  The  next  day,  Go- 
marus  invested  Arminius  with  the  honor  of  the  well- 
earned  Doctor's  degree,  with  the  usual  formalities. 
At  the  same  time  Arminius  delivered  his  great  ora- 
tion "  Concerning  the  Priestly  Office  of  Christ."  The 
teritimonial,  or  diploma,  given  by  the  academy  to 
Arminius,  is  full  of  flattery  of  its  kind.  It  is  recorded 
that  Arminius  was  the  first  to  receive  the  Doctor's 
degree  at  Ley  den. 

On  taking  his  chair,  he  found  that  the  stu- 
dents of  the  university  of  Leyden  had  been  giving 
more  attention  to  the  intricate  controversies  and 
knotty  questions  of  the  schoolmen  than  to  the 
studies  of  the  Scripture  and  theology.  The  sjurit 
in  which  he  entered  upon  his  work  is  expressed  by 


ABMIXIUS  AS  I'BOFESSOJi  AT  LEYDEN.       -tt 

himself  iu  a  letter  of  Heptember  22,  16()o.  "  I  will, 
therefore,  with  the  help  of  the  good  God,  address 
myself  to  this  province,  and  look  for  success  by  his 
al)uudaut  blessing.  He  kuow's  from  what  motive 
I  have  undertaken  this  office,  what  is  my  aim,  what 
object  I  have  in  view  in  discharging  the  duties  of 
it.  He  discerns  and  a})proves,  I  know.  It  is  not 
the  empty  honor  of  this  world — mere  smoke  and 
bubble — nor  the  desire  of  amassing  wealth  (which 
indeed  were  in  vain,  let  me  strive  to  the  utmost), 
that  has  impelled  me  hither ;  but  my  one  wish  is 
to  do  public  service  in  the  gospel  of  Christ,  and  to 
exhibit  that  gospel  as  powerfully  and  plainly  as 
possible  before  those  who  are  destined,  in  their 
time,  to  propagate  it  to  others."  (Brandt,  pp. 
187-1.S8.) 

Such  a  spirit  led  him  to  give  three  "elegant 
and  polished  oratioils "  on  these  topics,  "Of  the 
Object  of  tSacred  Theology,"  "  Of  the  Author  and 
End  of  Theology,"  and  "Certitude."  'j  By  this 
method,"  writes  Brandt,  "he  strove  to  instill  into 
the  minds  of  the  students  a  love  for  that  divine 
and  most  dignified  of  all  the  sciences ;  and  at  his 
very  entrance  into  his  office  he  judged  with  Soc- 
rates, the  wisest  of  the  Gentiles,  that  the  prin- 
cipal part  of  his  res})onsibility  stood  fulfilled  could 
he  only  succeed  iu  inflaming  his  disciples  with  an 
ardent  desire  of  learning." 

His  first  effort  was  to  change  the  condition  of 
things  he  found  at  Leyden,  and  he  began  by  lee- 


38  A  BMINIA  NISM  IN  HIS  TOR  F. 

tures  on  the  Bible  as  "  the  foundatiou  of  all  truth." 
During  this  time  he  brought  out  in  his  lectures  to 
the  students  his  full  and  free  method  of  Scripture 
interpretation,  which  charmed  his  hearers,  and 
made  the  curators  rejoice  in  this  acquisition  of  so 
great  and  noble  a  te.acher  in  place  of  Junius,  who 
had  been  removed  by  the  hand  of  death. 

In  the  meantime,  the  enemies  of  Arminius  were 
suspicious,  and  watching  for  an  opportunity  to  as- 
sail his  character  and  destroy  his  reputation.  An 
occasion  presented  itself  in  a  little  time.  Two  stu- 
dents of  theology  invited  him  to  "honor  Avith  his 
presence  their  theses,  or  positions,  which  they  had 
drawn  up  to  be  subjected  to  public  examination." 
One  was  on  Jtistificatioii,  the  other  on  Original  Si)i. 
Arminius  knew  that  other  professors  had  been  pres- 
ent under  such  circumstances,  when  the  doctrine  of 
the  theses  was  not  according  to  their  mind.  Now, 
since  there  were  some  things  in  these  he  did  not  in- 
dorse, his  enemies  made  it  an  occasion  of  great  fault- 
finding. While  no  open  rupture  followed,  Gomarus 
sought,  by  mutterings,  to  poison  the  minds  of  stu- 
dents, curators,  and  the  public,  and  set  them 
against  him.  The  next  year  Arminius  began  a 
course  of  lectures  on  the  Old  Testament,  with  an 
occasional  "exposition  of  certain  portions  of  the 
New."  This  so  greatly  displeased  Gomarus  that, 
meeting  Arminius,  he  broke  out  in  "a  burst  of 
passion,"  saying :  "You  have  invaded  my  profes- 
sorship !"     To  this,  Arminius  made  the  defense  that 


ARMINIUS  AS  FEOFESSOE  AT  LEYDEN.       39 

the  curators  had  given  him  a  certificate  "to  select 
themes  for  prelection  at  any  time,  not  only  from 
the  Old  Testament,  but  also  from  the  New,  pro- 
vided he  did  not  encroach  upon  the  particular  sub- 
ject in  which  Gomarus  might  be  engaged."  AVhile 
he  had  not  in  fact  trenched  upon  the  rights  of  Go- 
marus, the  charge  was  made,  and  served  as  an  oc- 
casion for  other  charges  and  complaints. 

There  were  many  injurious  reports  circulated 
by  his  enemies,  which  had  a  tendency  to  injure  his 
reputation  with  the  Government  and  among  the 
Churches.  During  the  years  1605-1608  there  was 
a  constant  besieging  of  Arminius  on  the  question 
of  predestination.  At  first  he  was  led  to  answer  in 
moderate  terms,  though  holding  the  views  that  later 
were  more  fully  and  sharply  advocated.  He  did 
not  desire  to  stir  up  unnecessary  antagonism  to  him- 
self, or  lead  men  to  the  advocacy  of  what  he  be- 
lieved to  be  wrong.  Gomarus,  as  the  leader,  and 
Helmichius,  John  Kuchlinas  his  uncle,  Lansber- 
gius,  and  others,  were  constantly  throwing  out  hints 
as  to  Arminius's  heterodoxy,  and  made  charges 
against  his  integrity  as  a  Christian  man,  and  in 
many  ways  sought  to  annoy  him,  and  lead  to  a 
statement  of  his  doctrines,  so  that,  as  ardent  be- 
lievers in  unconditional  predestination,  they  might 
have  somewhat  against  him  as  a  believer  in  the 
feeed-om  of  the  will,  and  that  Jesus  Christ  died  to 
make  salvation  possible  for  all  men.  They  often 
said,  Arminius  is  to  be  ranked  with  the  Pelagians, 


40  AliMINIAyiSM  IX  HISTORY. 

thougli  the  assisortion  was  as  often  refuted.  It  is  prob- 
able that  he  rasped  their  feeliugs  when  he  said  of 
the  })redestiuatiouisni  of  Calvin,  Beza,  and  Gomarus, 
that  it  "made  God  the  aiiflior  of  !<in."  "His  ad- 
versaries left  no  means  untried  by  which  to  burn 
some  brand  of  contumely  into  his  rising  reputation." 
A  rumor  was  set  afloat  by  some  means,  which  went 
out  through  all  Holland,  that  "  the  ])rofessors  of 
sacred  literature  differed  seriously  among  them- 
selves." The  matter  became  one  of  great  discus- 
sion. Brandt  says  that  this  "  was  everywhere  in 
the  mouths  of  carders,  furriers,  weavers,  and  other 
artisans  of  that  class."  A  novel  thing  occurred  in 
this  wild  and  ignorant  dispute.  Many  of  them  er- 
roneously atti'ibuted  the  opinions  of  Arminius  to 
Gomarus,  and  the  dogmas  of  (lomarus  to  Arminius. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  good  finally  ultimated  from 
this  great  discussion. 

Early  in  1605  the  curators  of  the  Leydeu  Uni- 
versity presented  Arminius  with  the  fasces  of  the 
incorporation,  and  gave  him  the  title  of  "Rector 
^ragnific."  This  new  honor  evidenced  how  he  stood 
with  them,  and  was  a  sure  indication  that  these 
laymen  had  all  confidence  in  his  learning,  integrity, 
and  skill  in  conducting  the  affairs  of  their  rising 
school.  But  this  only  led  his  enemies  to  a  bittei-er 
warfare.  If  he  chanced  to  "advance  certain  argu- 
ments which  were  also  employed  by  popish  writers 
themselves,  by  Lutherans,  and  others  besides  the 
Reformed,  the  clamor  was  forthwith   raised  by  ig- 


ABMINIUS  AS  PROFESSOR  AT  LEYDEN.       41 

uorant  persons  that   he  had  gone  over  to  the  ene- 
my's camp."     (Brandt,  p.  209.) 

About  the  university  and  in  Leyden  matters 
were  all  astir,  and  temper  was  at  fever-heat.  It 
seemed  as  if  nearly  all  of  accusation  was  against 
Arminius.  The  basest  construction  was  placed  on 
"  his  best  words  and  deeds."  It  was  charged  tliat  he 
circulated  his  own  written  books  among  his  stu- 
dents, following  in  that  respect  Calvin,  Junius,  and 
others.  This  act  was  called  a  crime.  He  was 
charged  with  teaching  against  unconditional  pre- 
destination. One  Festus  Homiuius  was  bold  to  ut- 
ter severe  charges  against  Arminius  behind  his 
back  which  he  dared  not  repeat  before  his  face. 

His  followers  and  admirers  came  in  for  a  large 
share  of  accusation  "of  the  same  crimes  which 
were  imputed  to  himself ;  the  discourses  and  argu- 
ments by  which  they  sought  to  establish  the  doctrines 
of  the  Christian  faith  being  subjected  to  misinter- 
pretation." If  a  student  became  in  any  way  a  spe- 
cial admirer  of  Arminius,  or  seemed  to  be  a  fa- 
vorite with  him,  he  was  instantly  marked,  and  some 
new  insult  was  heaped  upon  Arminius. 

This  feverish  excitement  soon  spread  to  some 
ecclesiastical  bodies,  and  charges  were  made  against 
various  persons  who  in  any  sense  favored  Arminius 
and  his  doctrines.  It  did  not  require  a  very  acute 
observer  of  the  events  of  history  to  prognosticate 
that  the  time  would  come  when  an  open  rupture  on 
doctrine    would    occur,    which    might   involve    the 


42  A  R  MINI  A  XISM  IX  HIS  TOnV. 

States  of  Holland  as  well  as  the  Church  of  the  Re- 
formed, an<l  might  be  accompanied  by  instances  of 
bloodshed  and  martyrdom.  Intolerance  on  the  part 
of  the  Reformed  might  develop  what  followed  the 
intolerance  of  the  Papal  Church. 

Arminius,  on  the  4th  of  May,  IGOo,  demon- 
strated his  belief  in  Divine  Providence  in  a  public 
disputation  "Concerning  the  Righteousness  and  Ef- 
ficacy of  Divine  Providence  Respecting  Evil."  His 
thesis  was  one  of  his  most  polished  and  elaboi-ately 
prepared.  "  He  very  learnedly,"  says  Brandt,  "ex- 
plained in  what  manner  it  had  to  do,  not  only  with 
the  beginning,  ])ut  also  with  the  progress  and  with 
the  end  of  sin.  Making  allusion,  in  another  place, 
to  the  circumstance  and  that  controversy,  he  ob- 
serves :  '  There  are  two  stumbling-blocks  against 
which  I  am  solicitously  on  my  guard — not  to  make 
(rod  the  author  of  sin,  and  not  to  do  away  with 
the  freedom  inherent  in  the  human  Avill ;  which 
two  things,  if  any  one  knows  to  avoid,  there  is  no 
action  he  shall  imagine  whicli  1  will  not  most 
cheerfully  allow  to  be  ascribed  to  the  providence 
of  God,  if  due  regard  be  only  had  to  the  Divine 
excellence.'"     (Brandt,  p.  221.) 

The  student  of  Arminianism  will  not  fail  to  ob- 
serve two  most  significant  facts.  When  Arminius 
gave  utterance  to  any  doctrine,  however  carefully 
worded,  he  was  at  once  misquoted,  his  statements 
perverted  to  other  meanings  than  such  as  he  in- 
tended, and  constructions  placed  upon  his  doctrines 


ABMINIUS  AS  PROFESSOR  AT  LEYDEN.       4o 

foreign  to  their  original  intent.  When  he  appealed 
to  his  written  statements — for  he  was  very  scrupu- 
lous to  preserve  his  thoughts  carefully  written  out, 
in  either  Latin  or  his  native  tongue — and  compared 
his  doctrines  with  that  of  the  early  Church,  he  si- 
lenced the  oavilers,  and  often  they  were  forced  to 
admit  the  truth  of  his  teachings  as  being  in  har- 
mony with  the  doctrines  of  the  Fathers  and  the 
Scriptures.  It  mattered  not  whether  he  Avas  called 
before  the  Classis,  the  curators,  the  National  Synod, 
the  faculty  of  the  university,  in  a  private  company, 
or  by  a  single  person,  Arminius  was  always  ready, 
armed  and  equipped  for  a  disputation,  and  always 
clearly  gave  a  reason  for  his  faith  and  doctrine, 
backing  them  up  with  many  Scriptures,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  early  Fathers  and  to  some  of  the  mod- 
ern divines,  who  held  to  views  similar  to  his  own. 
It  will  also  be  observed  that  he  never  hesitated 
to  appear,  when  appeal  was  made,  to  meet  the  best 
disputants  on  these  great  questions ;  nor  did  he 
swerve  from  the  same  faith,  having  once  become 
fully  persuaded  of  its  truth.  He  was  always  the 
advocate  of  salvation  provided  for  all  men,  free- 
dom of  the  will  to  choose  or  reject  God's  .offers  of 
mercy,  and  that,  under  an  unconditional  election, 
God  was  the  author  of  sin.  When  stirred  to  his 
soul's  depths  by  a  consideration  of  the  dangers  re- 
sulting from  teaching  the  doctrine  of  unconditional 
predestination,  he  spoke  to  the  point,  and  men  knew 
precisely  what  he  meant. 


44  A  n  MINI.  1  XIKM  7  .V  HIS  TO  R  ] '. 

The  Question  ok  a  National  Synod.  - 
xVrminius  i^aw  tlio  strife  and  disputatiou  in  his 
loved  Netherlauds  on  those  subjects  which  wei'e 
purely  of  a  theological  character,  and  he  also  knew 
that  they  might  be  carried  so  far  as  to  assume  a 
political  cast.  Having  brought  his  lectures  on  Jo- 
nah to  a  close,  and  opened  the  year  1606  with  a 
course  on  Malachi,  on  the  eighth  day  of  February 
he  resigned  his  rectorship  of  the  School  of  Tiieology. 
A  goodly  company  were  assembled,  and  he  gave 
his  excellent  oration  on  "Religious  Dissension." 
The  oration  was  not  the  spontaneous  offering  of  the 
hour,  l)ut  something  he  had  carefully  prepared  after 
fully  thinking  out  all  its  points,  and  noting  its  bear- 
ings upon  the  discussions  of  the  day. 

In  this  oration  he  unfolded  the  subject  of  dis- 
sension in  its  "  nature  and  effects,  causes  and  rem- 
edies, with  such  freedom  of  speech  as  the  weight  of 
the  subject  itself  and  the  agitated  circumstances  of 
the  Church  seemed  to  require.  In  particular,  as 
the  remedy  commonly  considered  to  be  the  most  effi- 
cacious for  allaying  theological  dissensions,  Avas  a 
convention  of  the  ]iarties  at  variance  (which  the 
Greeks  call  a  Synod,  the  Latins  a  Council),  lie  un- 
folded on  that  same  occasion,  fully  and  piously,  the 
])rin('iple  on  which  a  C-ouncil  of  the  kind  referred  to 
ought  to  be  constituted,  so  as  to  warrant  tlie  just 
and  rational  expectation  that  it  will  issue  in  good 
works  of  the  most  salutary  character."  (Brandt, 
p.  246.) 


A  RMINI  US  A  S  PB  OFESS  OR  AT  LE  YD  EN.       45 

Thei-e  had  beeu  a  demaud  made  some  years  be- 
fore this  for  a  National  Synod.  As  early  as  1597 
discussions  and  controversies  had  arisen  in  such 
places  as  Gouda,  Hoorn,  and  Medenblick,  "not 
only  respecting  Divine  predestination,  but  also  con- 
cerning the  authority  of  the  Belgic  Confession  and 
Palatine  Catechism,  and  the  right  and  orthodox  in- 
terpretation of  certain  phrases."  The  demand  was 
so  great  that  finally  some  of  the  States  of  Holland 
led  in  granting  liberty  to  their  pastors  to  hold  such 
a  Synod.  It  was  expressly  stated  "  that  the  Belgic 
Confession  of  Faith  should  be  revised,  and  that  it 
should  be  carefully  considered  in  what  way,  most 
fitly,  according  to  the  Word  of  God,  the  true  doc- 
trine and  concord  of  the  Keformed  Church  of  the 
Netherlands  might  be  vindicated,  preserved,  and 
promoted,  and  the  dissensions  that  had  arisen  be 
allayed."     {Ihid.,  247.) 

But  the  States  General  had  not  considered  it 
necessary  to  convene  a  National  Synod,  even  though 
many  of  the  States  had  asked  for  it.  When  Ar- 
minius  began  to  be  celebrated,  and  his  words  moved 
other  Holland  professors  and  pastors  who  differed 
from  him  in  doctrine,  leave  was  given,  March  15, 
1606,  by  the  States  General,  to  the  assembling  of 
a  National  Synod.  The  States  General  of  the  Neth- 
erlands marked  out  for  it  the  same  terms  and  duties 
as  eight  years  previously  had  been  designated.  The 
Synod  was  to  make  "revision  of  the  Confession 
[Belgic]  and  _Catechism  of  said  Chui'ches  [Re- 
4 


46  A  RMINIA  NISM  /.V  If  IS  TOR  Y. 

formed],  and  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Constitution  Here- 
tofore in  use  among  them."     (Brandt,  p.  249.) 

Immediately  there  sprung  up  much  discussion 
over  the  word  "revision."  One  party  claimed  that 
it  was  used  in  a  "forensic"  sense,  and  meant  that 
"the  entire  doctrine  comprehended  in  the  summa- 
ries was  called  in  question  ;  that  by  this  edict  in- 
jury was  done  to  these  sacred  canons  of  the  Re- 
formed faith,  which  were  formerly  received  Avith  so 
great  applause."  The  Reformed  pastors  and  pro- 
fessors, heartily  holding  to  "  unconditional  predesti- 
nation "  and  the  accompanying  doctrines,  were  wholly 
opposed  to  the  word  "revision,"  while  Armiuius, 
Uytenbogaert,  and  men  of  like  faith,  held  to  the 
word  "revision."  »Some  said  it  was  only  to  be  a 
"re-examination"  of  the  Confession. 

Controversy  and  discussion  waxed  warm.  The 
sturdy  Dutch  were  moved.  A  Synod  of  South 
Holland  was  held  in  August,  1606,  at  Gorcum, 
known  in  local  history  as  the  Gorcum  Synod.  A 
committee  of  four  men  were  appointed  to  proceed 
to  Leyden  and  interview  the  professors  of  theology, 
and  ask  them  "to  peruse  and  examine  with  all  dil- 
igence the  Confession  and  Catechism  hitherto  in  use 
in  these  realms."  These  professors  were  requested 
""that  if,  in  these  writings  of  the  Confession  and 
the  Catechism,  any  one  had  observed  aught  worthy 
of  remark,  he  should  signify  the  same,  and  set  it 
forth  in  good  and  solid  reasons  and  arguments 
as  speedily  as  practicable,   and  that,   if   possible, 


ARMINIVS  AS  PROFESSOR  AT  LEYDEyf.      47 

before  the  next  meeting  of  the  Classis."  (Jbld., 
256.) 

The.  Synod  also,  by  letter,  apprised  other  Synods 
in  the  various  States  of  the  Netherlands  of  what 
they  had  done.  When  the  committee  reached  Ley- 
den  they  first  called  on  Gomarus  and  made  known 
their  errand.  He  hesitated,  and  declined  to  make 
answer  unless  the  dean  (Armiuius)  would  call  the 
theological  faculty  together.  Trelcatius  answered 
much  the  same  way.  The  committee  said  that  the 
Synod  desired  their  answers  as  individuals — profes- 
sors— and  not  as  a  faculty.  When  Armiuius  was 
waited  u})ou,  he  at  once  acquiesced  iu  the  request  of 
the  Gorcum  Synod.  He  thought  the  proper  way 
was  for  each  jirofessor  to  give  the  result  of  his  in- 
dependent examination  of  the  Confession  and  Cat- 
echism, and  not  give  the  result  as  a  faculty.  Go- 
marus and  Trelcatius  finally  consented  to  follow  the 
course  of  x^rminius. 

The  way  seemed  providentially  opened  for  the 
great  mind  and  heart  of  Armiuius  to.  have  full  play 
in  an  interpretation  of  the  Confession  as  harmo- 
nized with  Scripture.  He  made  a  most  careful  re- 
view of  the  Belgic  Confession,  and  the  Palatinate 
Catechism,  and  the  polity  of  the  Reformed  Church 
iu  Holland.  He  counseled  with  his  friends  of  like 
views.  He  confided  much  iu  the  judgment  of  John 
Halsberg,  a  faithful  minister  of  the  Church  at  Am- 
sterdam. Unfortunately,  this  noble  friend  was 
soon  stricken  down  by  death,  and  Armiuius  mourned 


48  ARMINIANISM  IN  JIISTORY. 

him  as  a  brother  beloved.  It  Rccined  all-iinporta'Dt 
that  at  thih!  time  Arminius  shouhl  remain  in  good 
liealth,  so  as  to  prosecute  his  studies  and  prei)are 
hifs  2)apcrs  for  the  coming  Synod. 

It  was  marveh:»us  how  many  arose  to  malign  this 
great  scholar  and  eminent  Christian.  He  who  saw 
more  clearly  the  light  of  God's  truth  than  the  ma- 
jority of  thinkers,  and  sought  to  break  the  fetters 
fastened  upon  so  many  minds,  was  hated,  scorned, 
scoffed,  persecuted  everywhere.  But  he  held  on, 
true  to  God  and  his  Scripture,  with  a  heart 
abounding  in  love  for  his  fellow-men  bound  in 
chains  of  sin. 

The  deputies  of  South  and  North  Holland  pe- 
titioned the  States  General  for  a  preliminary  Synod, 
to  be  held  at  The  Hague,  to  arrange  the  details  and 
work  of  the  National  Synod.  After  due  delibera- 
tion the  request  was  granted,  and  the  22d  of  May, 
1608,  fixed  as  the  date  of  its  sitting.  Much  dis- 
cussion was  carried  forwaixl  in  almost  every  part 
of  the  two  Hollands.  A.sj)ersions  were  made  against 
Arminius.  He  often  met  and  refuted  them  in  his 
accustomed  manner.  Forbearance  at  last  ceased 
to  be  a  virtue,  and  early  in  1G08  he  began  a  de- 
fense, in  vindication  of  himself  and  his  teachings, 
in  three  ways — 

1.  By  a  request  and  a  subsequent  letter,  ad- 
dressed to  Hijipolytus  a  Collibus,  the  and)assador 
to  the  States  of  the  lUiited  Provinces  of  tlie  illus- 
trious    Prince     Palatine,     Frederick    the    Fourth. 


ARMINIUS  AS  PROFESSOR  AT  LEYDEN.       49 

Following  this,  he  was  admitted,  on  invitation  of 
the  ambassador,  to  his  court  at  The  Hague.  Hip- 
polytus  received  the  Leydeu  professor  courteously, 
and  heard  a  candid  and  accurate  explanation  of  his 
opinions  "concerning  the  Divinity  of  the  Son  of 
God,  Providence  and  Divine  predestination,  Grace 
and  Free-will,  and  also  on  the  subject  of  Justifica- 
tion." This  learned  and  candid  nobleman  grasped 
the  arguments  of  Arminius,  and  accepted  them  as 
the  true  expression  of  the  mind  of  God  regarding 
these  important  doctrines.  At  the  solicitation  of 
Hippolytus,  Arminius  drew  up  (April  5,  1008)  that 
"most  erudite  and  elaborate  epistle,"  which  is  now 
among  the  published  works  of  Arininius.  It  is  "a 
succinct  defense  of  his  doctrine,  as  well  as  of  his 
life."     (Brandt,  p.  302.) 

2.  By  a  reply  "  which  is  esteemed  as  an  apology 
to  thirty-one  defamatory  articles  falsely  ascribed  to 
him  and  Adrian  Borrius." 

3.  By  the  Declaration  of  Sentiments,  delivered 
on  the  30th  of  October,  1(308,  before  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  States  in  full  assembly  at  The 
Hague  (which  will  be  noticed  in  a  succeeding 
chapter).  In  this  Declaration  of  Sentiments  Ar- 
minius presented  in  a  most  successful  manner 
the  subjects  of  predestination.  Divine  providence, 
the  freedom  of  the  will,  the  grace  of  God,  the  Di- 
vinity of  the  Son  of  God,  and  the  justification  of 
men  before  God.  He  then  followed  each  case 
with  an  argument  of  his  own  in   opposition,  estab- 


50  A  RMINIA  NIS3I  IN  HIS  TORY. 

lishiug  his  propositions  by  reference  to  the  Scrip- 
tures, the  teachings  of  the  Fathers,  and  to  the 
history  of  the  early  Church. 

It  is  a  great  misiprtuue,  as  it  seems,  so  soon 
after  the  conclusion  of  his  defense  of  the  position 
which  he  had  taken  regarding  Calvinism,  that, 
at  the  age  of  forty-nine  years,  he  should  have  ceased 
to  work  and  live.  His  death  occurred  on  the  19th 
of  October,  IGOO. 

James  Arminius  was  distinguished  among  men 
for  "the  virtue  and  amiability  of  his  private,  do- 
mestic, and  social  character  among  Christians ;  for 
his  charity  toward  those  who  differed  from  him  in 
opinion  ;  among  preachers  for  his  zeal,  eloquence, 
and  success ;  and  among  divines  for  his  acute  yet 
large  and  comprehensive  views  of  theology,  his 
skill  in  argument,  and  candor  and  courtesy  in  con- 
troversy." He  was  a  man  of  great  learning ;  his 
influence  in  the  religious  world  had  really  but  just 
begun,  and  had  another  decade  of  years  been  added 
to  his  life,  there  is  no  telling  what  he  might  have 
accomplished.  His  death  left  the  controversy  be- 
tween the  Calvinists  and  his  own  party  in  such  a 
condition  that  some  one  must  take  it  up  and  carry 
it  forward.  His  motto  was  "  Bona  comcieiitia  par- 
adUioi — A  good  conscience  is  a  paradise."  The  great 
Hugo  Grotius  said  of  him  :  "  Condemned  by  others, 
he  condemned  none." 


Chapter  III. 

ARMINIAN  LEADERS. 

Leaders  in  Arminianism— Simon  Episcopius,  a  Great  Scholar 
and  Theologian — Education — Adopted  by  the  Senate  of 
Amsterdam — At  the  University  of  Jjeyden— His  Theses 
and  Disputations — When  he  adopted  Arminianism — A 
Student  of  Gomarus  and  Arminius — Arminins  made  the 
Greater  Impression — Episcopius  tlie  Delender  of  Armin- 
ianism —  Uytenbogaert — Fine  Personal  Appearance — 
Pastor  at  Utrecht — Formerly  a  Student  with  Arminius 
at  Geneva — Uytenbogaert  Anxious  for  Toleration — Pre- 
sided at  Remonstrant  Synod  at  Wallevick — Chaplain  to 
an  Embassy  to  Paris — At  Antwerp — Goods  confiscated 
and  he  banished — Fled  to  Rouen- -Secret  Return  to  Rot- 
terdam—Sentence revoked — Obtained  a  Part  of  his 
Goods — Prohibited  from  preaching — Strictly  watched — 
Died  —  Hugo  Grotius  —  Born— At  Leyden — Wrote  a 
Poem — At  Paris — Eminently  a  Litterateur- Pensioner 
of  Rotterdam — In  England — Utopian  Scheme  with  Ca- 
saubon  Embraced  Arminianism — Wrote  Much  for  it — 
A  Strong  Support— Arrested  and  a  Prisoner  at  Loewen- 
stein — Novel  Escape — In  France— Died  at  Roostock — 
Buried  at  Delft — Barneveldt,  a  Layman— Life  Admi- 
rably written  by  Motley — Conflict — Remonstrants  — 
Counter-remonstrants -Five  Points  of  Calvinism — Five 
Arminian  Articles — The  Things  they  controverted — The 
Vote  against  Arminianism— The  Victory  over  Armin- 
ianism was  not  of  Advantage  to  Calvinism — Statement 
of  Mosheim. 

The  death  of  James  Arminius  in  1609  did  not 
stop  the  great  controversy  between  Calvinism  and 
what    we    will    from   this   time    call   Arminianism. 

51 


r)2  ABMJNIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

While  the  Calvinists  in  Holhind  outnumbered'  the 
Anuiniaus  several  times,  and  theirs  was  the  })()i)ular 
belief  because  the  Government  sided  with  it,  there 
were  many  strong,  cultured,  and  conscientious  men, 
scholars  of  the  upper  class,  who  embraced  Annin- 
ianism  as  the  only  true  explanation  of  the  Divine 
government  in  the  matter  of  original  sin,  freedom 
of  the  will,  and  the  salvation  of  men.  The  cou- 
ti-oversy  was  carried  foi-ward,  some  of  the  time, 
under  the  auspices  of  the  State,  and  at  others  in  a 
more  private  manner,  and  in  the  Churches.  x\.t 
times  there  was  the  spirit  of  kindness  in  the  discus- 
sions, but  generally  the  opposite  feeling  prevailed. 
This  C(mtroversy  continued  until  the  whole  of  Hol- 
land was  in  a  blaze  of  excitement. 

Simon  Eihscopius. 

The  mantle  of  the  great  Arminius  fell  upon  Si- 
mon Episcopius  (1583-1644),  a  worthy  successor  of 
so  great  a  man.  Episcopius  was  called  at  once  to 
become  the  professor  of  Theology  in  Leyden  Uni- 
versity, in  the  p^ace  vacated  by  the  death  of 
Arminius.  Another  great  Armiuian  writer  was 
James  Uytenbogaert  (1557-1044),  preacher  at  The 
Hague  for  many  years,  and  "for  some  time  chap- 
lain of  Prince  Maurice."  These  two  men  became 
the  princi])al  leaders  in  the  controversy,  and  man- 
fully maintained  the  honor  and  dignity  of  Armin- 
ianism  against  all  adversaries.  There  were  two 
other    notable    advocates  of    Arminiauism — one    a 


A  RMINIA  N  LEA  DEBS.  53 

layman,  the  other  a  clergymau.  The  one  was  John 
Van  Olden  Barneveldt  (1549-1619),  advocate- 
general  of  Holland  and  Friesland,  a  statesman  of 
high  standing,  and  one  of  the  foremost  men  of  the 
Dutch  Republic.  He  was  a  staunch  friend  of  Ar- 
minius,  and  a  Qrm  believer  in  the  doctrine ;  and 
while  others  were  going  away  to  the  extreme  of 
Calvinism,  he  returned  from  his  former  belief  in 
Calvinism  to  a  belief  in  the  opposite.  Hugo  Gro- 
tius  (1583-1645),  "the  most  comprehensive  scholar 
of  his  age,  equally  distinguished  as  statesman,  ju- 
rist, theologian,  and  exegete,  sympathized  with  the 
Arminians."  These  two  noble  men  gave  all  their 
weight  of  influence  to  the  side  of  the  Arminians, 
and  by  words  and  actions  sought  to  advance  peace 
and  toleration. 

Simon  Episcopius,  whose  real  name  w^as  Bisschop, 
was  born  at  Amsterdam,  of  honorable  Christian  par- 
ents of  the  Reformed  belief.  Very  early  in  life 
this  youth  gave  decisive  proofs  of  a  vigorous  un- 
derstanding and  capacious  memory,  accompanied 
with  an  ardent  desire  to  obtain  information.  The 
time  of  his  birth  was  filled  with  danger  to  all  of  the 
Reformed  faith  in  Holland ;  for  the  persecutions 
carried  on  by  the  Spanish  Alva  were  cruel  and  un- 
mixed with  the  least  grain  of  mercy.  He  was  des- 
tined by  his  parents  for  one  of  the  learned  professions, 
but,  by  request  of  Burgomeister  Benning,  he  was 
finally  devoted  "to  the  pursuit  of  literature."  At 
the   public  Latin    school,   under  the    rectorship   of 


'")  4  A  R2IINIA  NISM  IX  HIS  TO  BY. 

Beckeraanus,  he  made  "rapid  progress  in  the  acqui- 
sition of  the  Greek  and  Latin  languages."  His 
rapid  advancement  and  brilliant  mind  brought  him 
to  the  attention  of  the  Senate  of  Amsterdam  as  a 
specially  bright  man,  and  one  worthy  of  their  con- 
sideration. They  had  found  before  this,  in  adopt- 
ing Armiuius,  that  they  had  adopted  a  man  who 
reflected  great  glory  upon  their  State,  and  so  they 
were  ready  and  willing  to  look  for  others  of  the 
same  general  character.  The  Senate  adopted  him 
as  one  of  their  ahonni,  or  Voeitterlings,  and  furnished 
him  the  means  to  complete  his  education.  Whether 
there  was  an  agreement  that  he  should  return,  at 
the  completion  of  his  education,  q-nd  engage  as 
their  minister,  or  not,  is  not  known.  He  was 
placed  in  the  University  of  Leyden,  where  he  com- 
pleted his  course,  and  was  made  Master  of  Arts 
February  27,  1606.  Now  his  theological  studies 
commenced,  and  were  chiefly  prosecuted  under  the 
direction  of  James  Arminius. 

In  his  theses  and  disputations  Episcopius  exhib- 
ited great  skill  and  learning.  His  proficiency  soon 
led  the  curators  and  professors  to  recognize  him 
as  "in  every  way  worthy  to  enter  the  ministry." 
This  information  having  been  communicated  to 
those  of  Amsterdam,  the  Senate  and  magistrates  of 
that  city  desired  to  hear  him  for  themselves,  and 
appointed  the  11th  of  June,  1607,  as  the  time,  and 
the  New  South  Church  as  the  place,  for  his  sermon. 
A  splendid  Dutch  audience  assembled  to  hear  and 


ARMINIAN  LEADERS.  55 

judge  for  themselves  as  to  this  remarkable  risiug 
man.  It  was  a  season  of  great  test  to  himself;  for, 
if  he  should  fail  in  his  undertaking  to  ^^I'each  a 
sermon  that  should  produce  a  marked  effect  upon 
their  minds  and  thus  establish  his  reputation,  his 
future  history  would  be  greatly  changed.  The  au- 
dience was  not  disappointed.  He  impressed  them 
as  a  master  workman,  clear  in  his  illustration,  strong 
in  his  logic,  elegant  in  his  rhetoric.  Episcopius 
was  very  soon  called  "  the  Dutch  Cicero."  His  ap- 
pointment soon  came  as  court  preacher  or  chaplain 
to  Prince  Maurice,  and  also  preacher  at  The  Hague. 
At  this  time  he  came  into  intimate  relations  with 
the  great  statesman,  John  of  Barneveldt,  an  emi- 
nent Arminiau. 

As  to  the  time  when  Episcopius  changed  his 
views  from  Calvinism  to  Arminianism,  we  are  wholly 
unable  to  discover.  It  is  probable  that  the  seeds 
of  a  change  were  early  planted  in  his  mind,  and 
that  the  real  change  was  a  thing  gradual  in  itself. 
When  he  became  a  student  in  theology  he  had  for  two 
of  his  professors,  Gomarus,  the  ardent  Calvinist,  and 
James  Arminius,  the  equally  ardent  antagonist  of  the 
doctrines  of  predestination.  Arminius  seems  to  have 
given  the  stronger  impression  to  the  young  mind, 
and  left  him  wholly  freed  from  the  bondage  of  Cal- 
vinism. During  the  latter  part  of  his  stay  iit  Ley- 
den  the  discussions  between  Arminius  and  Gomarus 
commenced.  At  first  they  were  very  private  be- 
tween themselves,  but  soon  began  to  be  open  and 


56  A  R  MINI  A  NIHM  IN  HIS  TOR  T. 

public.  Episcopius's  taste  for  discussion  naturully 
led  him  to  take  a  great  interest  in  these  discussions. 
These  disputations  concerning  predestination  were 
destined  thoroughly  to  agitate  all  the  Netherlands, 
and  iinally  to  reach  to  regions  far  away.  After 
the  death  of  Arminius  it  became  necessary  for 
Episcopius  to  defend  the  memory  of  his  great 
friend  and  teacher — a  task  which  he  performed  in 
the  most  admirable  manner. 

Uytknbogaekt. 

Uytenbogaert  was  an  able  defender  of  Armin- 
ianism,  standing  by  the  side  of  Simon  Episcopius, 
and  making  himself,  by  his  logic  and  great  attain- 
ments, sensibly  felt  in  these  theological  discussions. 
He  became  a  leader  of  the  Remonstrants,  "  was  an 
independent  and  earnest,  and  yet  a  moderate  and 
considerate  man,  everywhere  maintaining  a  firm 
and  upright  character,  and  incessantly  engaged  in 
making  peace  among  the  parties  of  Protestantism. 
As  a  preacher  he  stood  in  the  front  ranks  of 
the  Remonstrants,  for  his  logic,  rhetoric,  and  per- 
suasive eloquence.  He  was  a  native  of  Utrecht, 
born  1557.  His  theological  studies  were  con- 
ducted at  Geneva,  under  Bcza.  On  completing 
his  course  of  study  he  became  pastor  of  a  Church 
in  Utrecht  in  1584,  but  was  dismissed,  because 
of  his  liberal  views  regarding  predestination  and 
the  other  doctrines  of  Calvinism,  in  1589.  The 
succeeding  year  he  was  called  to  The  Hague,  and 


ARMINIAN  LEADERS.  57 

became  court  cbaplaiu  to  William,  and  tutor  to  liis 
sou.  Here  his  reputation  became  greater  than  ever 
as  a  preacher  aud  a  scholar." 

Uytenbogaert  was  a  man  of  fine  personal  ap- 
pearance, and  his  movements  combined  both  per- 
fect grace  and  dignity.  People  Avith  whom  he 
came  in  contact  were  charmed  by  his  wise  words 
and  superior  manners.  In  his  address  to  the  States 
he  set  before  them  "the  rights  and  duties  they 
were  bound  to  observe."  He  showed  the  inadmis- 
sibility of  compulsory  support  of  a  symbol,  demon- 
strated that  the  clergy  itself  had  occasioned  the 
troubles  in  the  Church,  and  that  the  object  of  the 
Church  was  to  enforce  the  principles  of  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  spiritual  powers.  He  demanded 
that  "the  State  should  examine  the  questions  in 
dispute  themselves,  and  bring  them  to  a  conclu- 
sion ;  and  that,  in  the  event  of  a  Synod  being 
called,  no  conclusion  should  be  reached  before  the 
opposing  party  should  have  an  opportunity  to  be 
heard  ;  and  finally,  that  if  fraternity  between  fac- 
tions could  not  be  obtained,  mutual  tolerance  should 
at  least  be  insured." 

The  influence  of  Uytenbogaert  was  great,  iuso- 
much  that  many  who  halted  about  accepting  Ar- 
minianism  and  breaking  away  from  Calvinism,  were 
moved  to  take  a  decided  stand  for  one  or  the  other. 
His  enemies  saw  and  felt  his  rising  powers  as  a  lo- 
gician and  ardent  advocacy  of  the  primitive  doc- 
trine, and  greatly  feared  his  influence  in  the  conn- 


58  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HISTOR  T. 

cils  of  the  State.  lu  order  to  prevent  his  iuflufeuce 
from  reaching  to  the  Netherlands,  and  break  his 
power  over  them  if  it  did  reach  them,  they  invoked 
the  aid  of  the  State.  When  this  was  brought  to 
bear  against  him,  it  was  not  possible  even  then  for 
his  enemies  to  close  his  mouth,  or  prevent  his  work 
for  his  favorite  doctrine. 

Uytenbogaert  was  anxious,  not  so  much  to  root 
out  Calvinism,  as  to  gain  the  principle  of  tolera- 
tion, so  that  Arminianism  might  have  legal  right  to 
existence.  He  was  willing  that  Calvinism  should 
live  and  be,  but  not  on  the  death  of  Aiiuiuian- 
ism.  He  seemed  to  be  willing  to  allow  the  various 
opinions  regarding  Christian  doctrines  to  live  and 
be  advocated  as  completely  as  their  adherents  miglit 
desire  ;  but  he  insisted  that  there  should  be  such  a 
perfect  degree  of  toleration  that  all  the  different 
doctrines  should  have  an  equal  right  to  public  dis- 
cussion, and  that  the  occupants  of  the  pulpits  of 
the  various  sects  should  be  free  to  preach  whatever 
doctrine  they  believed  to  be  true.  Nowhere  do  we 
find  that  Uytenbogaert  desiied  to  prevent  even  the 
Roman  Catholics  from  having  the  fullest  opportu- 
nity to  present  their  doctrines,  and  worship  accord- 
ing to  their  custom.  His  one  watchword  was  "Tol- 
eration." He  argued  this  when  chaplain  to  an 
embassy  to  Paris;  and  when,  in  1012,  he,  with 
Ei)iscopius,  held  a  collcxpiy  with  the  most  rigid 
Calvinists  at  The  Hague,  "in  the  vain  hope  of  se- 
curing peace,"  legal  proceedings  were  entered  against 


ARMINIAN  LEADERS.  59 

him  because  of  his  interpretation  of  tlie  Five  Points 
of  the  Remonstrants.  His  presiding  at  a  Remon- 
strant Synod  at  Wallevick  greatly  intensified  the 
hostility  of  his  enemies.  The  storm  of  persecution 
broke  upon  him  more  fiercely  than  ever,  and  he  re- 
moved to  Antwerp  in  1622,  when  the  sentence  of 
confiscation  of  property  and  banishment  was  pro- 
nounced against  him.  It  became  necessary  for  him 
to  go  to  Rouen,  in  France,  in  the  vain  hope  of  find- 
ing a  safe  retreat  and  rest  from  the  enemies  who 
sought  to  compass  his  death.  He  returned  secretly 
to  Rotterdam  in  1626,  and  was  secreted  by  friends. 
Here  he  secured  counsel,  who  sought  to  obtain  I'rom 
the  court  a  revocation  of  the  sentence  promulgated 
against  him  and  his  friends.  He  succeeded,  in 
1629,  in  obtaining  the  larger  part  of  his  goods, 
which  had  been  confiscated  some  years  before.  In 
1631  another  act  was  granted,  permitting  him  to 
reside  at  The  Hague,  and  "  be  present  during  pub- 
lic w^orship."  He  was  permitted  also  to  preach  a 
few  times ;  but  it  is  supposed,  because  of  the  fear 
still  entertained  of  his  wonderful  pulpit  eloquence, 
he  was  prohibited  from  continuing  his  teaching.  A 
strict  watch  was  kept  over  him,  lest  he  should  break 
over  bounds  and  lead  the  Arminian  party  to  success. 
The  Calvinistic  party  was  in  the  ascendency,  had 
absolute  control  of  the  Government,  and  were 
nearly  as  intolerant  as  the  Romanists  had  been  a 
few  years  before.  The  noble  and  scholarly  Uyten- 
bogaert   died  September  4,    1644,   a   man  of  God 


60  A  n  MINT  A  NLSM  fX  HTS  TOR  Y. 

and  intensely  loved  by  hii^  I'ullowers.  His  name, 
though  hard  to  pronounce,  has  been  almost  a  talis- 
man  and  a  tower  of  strength  to  the  Arminians  of 

Holland. 

Hugo  Grotius. 

Two  other  great  names,  Hugo  Grotius  and  John 
Van  Olden  Barneveldt,  are  to  be  united  with  Epis- 
copius  and  Uytenbogaert  as  defenders  and  leaders 
in  the  great  Armiuiau  movement — one  of  the  great- 
est of  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  and  early  part  of 
the  seventeenth  centuries. 

Hugo  Grotius  was  a  native  of  Delft,  born  April 
10,  1583.  So  rapid  was  his  progress  in  learning 
that,  when  eleven  years  old,  he  entered  the  Uni- 
versity of  Leyden,  and  distinguished  himself  in 
mathematics,  law,  and  theology.  He  was  able, 
Avhen  fourteen  years  of  age,  to  maintain  two  theses 
in  philosophy  with  great  skill,  and  also  write  a 
poem  in  Latin  in  honor  of  King  Henry  lY,  of 
France.  This  poem  was  so  highly  esteemed,  that 
when  the  next  year  he  visited  Paris  with  the  Dutch 
embassy,  he  received  an  introduction  to  the  king, 
who  gave  to  Grotius  a  brilliant  reception.  Grotius 
commenced  the  practice  of  law,  but  devoted  a 
large  portion  of  his  time  to  the  subject  of  literature. 
In  this  line  of  work  he  was  acute,  quick,  possessed 
of  an  excellent  judgment,  and  was  industrious. 
Each  year  he  published  a  new  book,  or  an  edition 
of  some  important  work  already  published  to  the 
world  by  a  scholar.     When   appointed  a  pensioner 


ARMIXIAN  LEADERS.  61 

of  Rotterdam  he  refused  the  office  unless  it  was  se- 
cured to  him  for  life,  which  was  granted.  In  the 
States  General,  a  legislative  assemblage,  lie  met 
Barneveldt,  with  whom  his  associations  Avere  of  the 
pleasantest  character,  and  continued  unabated  until 
the  cruel  death  of  Barneveldt.  On  visiting  Eng- 
land he  became  associated  with  Casaubon,  a  promi- 
nent Romanist,  with  whom  he  thought  and  planned 
a  union  of  the  Romanists  and  Protestants.  To  this 
project  he  gave  large  attention  and  his  deepest 
thought,  and  for  a  time  it  seemed  to  lie  very  near 
his  heart.  But  finding  it  utterly  impossible  to  se- 
cure this  result,  he  abandoned  his  Utopian  scheme. 
On  returning  to  Holland,  Grotius  gave  large  atten- 
tion to  the  docrines  of  Arminius,  more  so  than  ever 
before.  He  carefully  studied  Calvinism,  with  its 
necessitated  will,  predestination  and  reprobation, 
and  its  final  perseverance  of  the  saints ;  and  Ar- 
miaianism,  with  its  freedom  of  will,  its  salvation  by 
grace  on  the  exercise  of  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  pro- 
vision of  salv.ation  for  all  men,  and  individual  re- 
sponsibility,— and  fully  adopted  a  belief  in  Armin- 
ianism  as  the  only  true  solution  of  the  problem  of 
salvation.  He  commenced  to  write  for  it,  and  to 
advocate  it  publicly,  and  demanded  for  it  the  larg- 
est toleration.  His  great  thoughts  for  toleration, 
for  the  truth  of  Arminian  doctrine,  for  freedom  of 
the  will,  for  the  possibility  of  the  salvation  of  all 
people,  rang  out  in  words  that  arrested  and  de- 
manded attention.  His  written  words  were  equal 
5 


02  AnMjyjAXiSM  in  history. 

to  his  spoken  words.  IMen  listened  when  he  spoke, 
and  read  what  he  wrote.  AVe  liave  no  means  at 
present  for  determining  how  much  the  final  success 
of  Arminianism  depended  upon  his  arguments. 

Grotius  became  one  of  the  strong  supporters  of 
Arminianism.  He  was  an  eloquent  disinitaut.  Any 
antagonist  found  him  a  foemau  worthy  of  his  steel. 
In  the  latter  part  of  his  discussions  and  writings  he 
introduced  some  novelties  in  ex])laining  and  enforc- 
ing his  principles  which  were  not  satisfactory  to  the 
rigid  Arminiaus,  nor  are  they  held  by  the  Armin- 
ians  of  to-day.  However,  he  was  to  the  last  an 
Arminian,  and  ventured  everything  upon  its  altar. 
Having  by  his  persistency  gained  .the  ill-will  of 
Prince  Maurice,  he  was  arrested  and  placed  in  the 
F'ortress  of  Loewenstein,  which  was  built  at  the  ex- 
tremity of  an  island  formed  by  the  ^Nlaas  and  the 
Waal.  From  the  authorities  his  wife  had  i)ermis- 
sion  to  remain  a  ])art  of  the  time  with  him  in 
prison,  but  his  son  was  not  permitted  to  come  near. 
During  the  eighteen  months  of  imprisonment  his 
great  solace  was  study.  He  was  allowed  to  have 
books  brought  in  by  a  vessel,  and  landed  at  the 
foot  of  the  fortress,  and  a  large  box  in  which  they 
came  was  taken  to  his  room.  This  box  was  filled 
usually  with  books  that  were  not  wanted,  and  sent 
back  to  the  mainland.  On  the  occasion  of  sending 
back  a  box  which  was  pretty  large,  the  guards  ex- 
amined it  rather  carefully,  to  observe  that  nothing 
Mas  concealed  that  was  contraband.     His  wife  ob- 


ARMIN-IAN  LEA  DEBS.  63 

served  thiit,  after  a  time,  the  soldiers  became  very 
lax  iu  their  examinations  of  the  box,  wliich  kept 
coming  and  going  on  an  average  of  about  once  a 
week.  On  one  occasion  she  persuaded  her  husband 
to  get  into  the  box,  which  he  did,  and  she  made  it 
fast,  when  it  was  carried  to  the  wharf  and  on  board 
the  vessel,  and  to  the  mainland,  where  it  was 
awaited  by  friends,  who  received  it  very  carefully 
and  took  it  to  a  place  of  safety,  where  they  took 
Grotius  from  his  confinement  in  time  to  save  his 
life.  After  being  secreted  in  the  town  ft)r  some 
time,  he  went  to  France  as  the  best  place  for  safety. 
His  wife  was  retained  in  prison  for  a  few  weeks 
after  his  flight,  and  then  set  at  liberty  for  the  rea- 
son that  they  had  no  authority  for  detaining  her. 
She  soon  joined  her  husband  in  France.  Grotius 
was  received  quite  kindly  by  King  Louis  XIV  in 
France,  who  granted  him  a  pension,  which  was 
not,  however,  very  regularly  paid.  After  many 
changes  in  fortune,  he  went  to  Rostock,  and  died 
on  the  28th  of  August,  1645.  His  body  was  car- 
ried back  to  Delft,  and  deposited  in  the  grave  of 
his  ancestor's.  His  works  form  a  valuable  contribu- 
tion to  the  subject  of  theology,  especially  in  the 
discussion  of  the  doctrines  of  Armiuianism  as  com- 
pared with  the  doctrines  of  Calvinism. 

John  Van  Olden  Barneveldt. 

John  Van  Olden  Barneveldt  was  one  of  the  il- 
lustrious successors  of  the  great  James  Armiuius,  and 


64  ARMINFANISM  IX  HISTORY. 

strongly  advocated  his  doctrine  as  a  statesman.-  He 
was  a  layman,  an  office-liolder,  a  citizen  of  great  in- 
fluence, used  to  communion  and  intercourse  with  the 
great  and  cultured  ones  of  earth,  and  yet  never  for  a 
moment  forgot  his  duties  to  God  and  strong  adhe- 
rence to  Arminianism.  For  his  devotion  to  the 
cause  of  Arminianism  and  toleration,  he  paid  the 
cost  with  a  martyr's  death.  His  life  has  been  ad- 
mirably written  by  Motley,  and  I  will  nut  reiieat  it. 

Five  Points  and  Five  Articles, 

We  are  brought,  at  this  point,  to  the  period  of 
conflict  between  the  two  great  systems  of  doctrine 
before  the  States  of  Hollaiul  and  West  Friosland, 
which  occurred  in  1610.  The  representatives  of 
these  two  strong  States  were  assembled  in  a  legal 
Conclave.  The  Calvinists  h(;ld  to  what  was  called 
the  Five  Points:  1st.  Unconditional  Election  ;  2d. 
Atonement  Limited  to  the  Elect;  3d.  Depravity 
Total  as  to  Ability  and  Merit;  4th.  Effectual  Call- 
ing or  Irresistible  Grace  ;  5th.  Perseverance  of  the 
Saints.  These  in  their  interpretation  embodied  the 
objectionable  elements  of  the  Calvin istic  theory. 
The  Armiuiaui?  laid  before  this  Assembly  of  Rep- 
resentatives their  protest  to  these  Five  Points,  in 
Five  Articles.  They  were  carefully  considered  by 
the  Arminians,  were  drawn  uj)  by  Uytenbogaert, 
and  signed  by  forty-five  ministers,  and  received  the 
name  of  Remonstrance.  The  Calvinists,  realizing 
the  force  of  their  statements,  and  knowing  that  by 


.1  R  MINI  A  N  LEA  DEES.  65 

8ome  means  their  power  must  be  parried  or  wholly 
broken,  issued  a  Couuter-remonstrauce.  Here  the 
world  had  two  names  for  the  two  theological  par- 
ties ;  namely,  the  Remonstrants,  who  were  called 
Protestants  against  Calvinism ;  and  the  Counter- 
Remonstrants,  who  were  the  same  as  the  Calvinists, 
or,  as  they  were  sometimes  called  in  Holland,  the 
Gomarists. 

These  Five  Articles  are  worthy  of  a  place  in  all 
Arminian  works  of  theology ;  for  they  are  the 
real  foundation  of  the  doctrine,  and  by  them  all 
purporting  to  be  Armiuianism  may  be  critically 
tried. 

Article  I. 

That  God,  by  an  eternal,  unchangeable  purpose 
in  Jesus  Christ  his  Son,  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world,  hatli  determined,  out  of  the  fallen,  sin- 
ful race  of  men,  to  save  in  Christ,  for  Christ's  sake 
and  through  Christ,  those  who,  through  the  grace 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  shall  believe  on  this  his  Son 
Jesus,  and  shall  persevere  in  this  faith,  and  obe- 
dience of  faith,  through  his  grace,  even  to  the  end, 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  to  leave  the  incorrigible  and 
unbelieving  in  sin  and  under  wrath,  and  to  con- 
demn them  as  alienate  from  Christ,  accoi'diug  to 
the  word  of  the  Gospel  in  John  iii,  36:  "He  that 
believeth  on  the  Sou  hath  everlasting  life  :  and  he 
that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life  ;  but 
the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him," — and  according 
to  other  passages  of  Scripture  also. 


66  A RMINIA  NIHM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

Articlh  II. 

Tliat,  agreeably  thereto,  Jesus  Christ,  tlie  Sa- 
vior of  the  world,  died  for  all  men  and  for  every 
man,  so  that  he  has  obtained  for  them  all,  by  his 
death  on  the  cross,  redemption  and  the  forgiveness 
of  sins ;  yet  that  no  one  actually  enjoys  that  for- 
giveness of  sins  except  the  believer  according  to  the 
word  of  the  Gospel  of  John  iii,  16  :  "  God  so  loved 
tlie  world,  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  that 
whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but 
have  everlasting  life  ;"  and  in  the  First  Epistle  of 
John  ii,  2  :  "And  he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins : 
and    not    for  ours  only,   but   also    for   the    sins   of 

the  whole  world." 

Article  III. 

That  man  has  not  saving  grace  of  himself,  nor  of 
the  energy  of  his  free  will,  inasmuch  as  he,  in  the 
state  of  apostasy  and  sin,  can,  of  and  by  himself, 
neither  think,  will,  nor  do  anything  that  is  truly 
good,  such  as  saving  faith  eminently  is ;  but  that 
it  is  needful  that  he  be  born  again  of  God  in  Christ 
through  his  Holy  Spirit,  and  renewed  in  under- 
standing, inclination  or  will,  and  all  his  powers, 
in  order  that  he  may  rightly  understand,  think, 
will,  and  effect  what  is  truly  good,  according  to  the 
word  of  Christ,  John  xv,  5:  "  Without  me  ye  can 

do  nothing." 

Article  IV. 

That  this  grace  of  God  is  the  beginning,  con- 
tinuance, and  accomplishment  of  all  good,  even  to 


A  BMINIA N  LEA  DEES.  67 

thLs  extent,  that  the  regenerate  man  liimself,  with- 
out prevenieut  or  assisting,  awakening,  following, 
and  co-operative  grace,  can  neither  think,  will,  nor 
do  good,  nor  withstand  any  temptation  to  evil  ;  so 
that  all  good  deeds  or  movements  that  can  be  con- 
ceived must  be  ascribed  to  the  grace  of  God  in 
Christ.  But  as  respects  the  mode  of  the  operation 
of  this  grace,  it  is  not  irresistible,  inasmuch  as  it 
is  written  concerning  many  that  they  have  resisted 
the  Holy  Ghost — -Acts  vii,  and  elsewhere  in  many 

pljlces. 

Article  V. 

That  those  who  are  incorporated  into  Christ  by 
a  true  faith,  and  have  thereby  become  partakers  of 
his  life-giving  Spirit,  have  thereby  full  power  to 
strive  against  Satan,  sin,  the  world,  and  their  own 
flesh,  and  to  win  the  victory,  it  being  understood 
well  that  it  is  ever  through  the  assisting  grace 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  that  Jesus  Christ  assists 
them  through  his  Spirit  in  all  temptations,  extends 
to  them  his  hand,  and  if  only  they  are  ready  for 
the  conflict,  and  desire  his  help  and  are  not  in- 
active, keeps  them  from  falling,  so  that  they,  by 
no  craft  or  power  of  Satan,  can  be  misled  nor 
plucked  out  of  Christ's  hands,  according  to  the 
word  of  Christ,  John  x,  28:  "Neither  shall  any 
man  pluck  them  out  of  my  hand."  But  whether 
they  are  capable,  through  negligence,  of  forsaking 
again  the  first  beginnings  of  their  life  in  Christ, 
or  again   returning   to   this    present  evil   world,   of 


68  ARM  IN  I  AN  ISM  IN  HISTORY. 

turuiug  away  from  the  holy  doctriue  which  Was 
delivered  theiu,  of  losing  a  good  couscience,  of  be- 
coming devoid  of  grace, — that  must  be  more  par- 
ticularly determined  out  of  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
befoi-e  we  ourselves  can  teach  it  with  the  full  per- 
suasion of  our  minds. 

These  Articles,  thus  set  forth  and  taught,  the 
Remonstrants  deem  agreeable  to  the  Word  of 
God,  tending  to  edification,  and,  as  regards  this  ar- 
gument, sufficient  for  salvation,  so  that  it  is  not 
necessary  or  edifying   to  rise  higher  or  to  descend 

deeper. 

Doctrines  Rejected. 

The  doctrines  rejected  by  these  five  Armiuian 
propositions  before  the  States  Assembly  are  stated 
as  follows : 

1.  That  God  has,  before  the  Fall,  and  even  be- 
fore the  creation  of  men,  by  an  unchangeable  de- 
cree, foreordained  some  to  eternal  life,  and  others 
to  eternal  damnation,  without  any  regard  to  right- 
eousness or  sin,  to  obedience  or  disobedience,  and 
simply  l)ecause  it  so  pleased  him,  in  order  to  show 
the  glory  of  his  righteousness  and  his  mercy  to  the 
other.      (This  is  the  Supralapsarian  view.) 

2.  That  God,  in  view  of  the  Fall,  and  in  just 
condemnation  of  our  first  parents  and  their  poster- 
ity, ordained  to  exempt  a  ])art  of  mankind  from  the 
consequences  of  the  Fall,  and  to  save  them  by  his 
free  grace  ;   but  to  leave  the  rest,  without  regard  to 


AFxMINIAN  LEADERS  69 

age  or  moral  couditiou,  to  their  condemnation,  for 
the  glory  of  his  righteousness.  (The  Sublapsariau 
view.) 

3.  That  Christ  died,  not  for  all  men,  but  only 
for  the  elect. 

4.  That  the  Holy  Ghost  works  in  the  elect  by 
irresistible  grace,  so  that  they  must  be  converted 
and  saved ;  while  the  grace  necessary  and  suffi- 
cient for  conversion,  faith,  and  salvation  is  with- 
held from  the  rest,  although  they  are  eternally 
called  and  invited  by  the  revealed  will  of  God. 

5.  That  those  who  have  received  this  irresistible 
grace  can  never  totally  and  finally  lose  it,  but  are 
guided  and  preserved  by  the  same  grace  to  the  end. 

"These  doctrines,  the  Remonstrants  declare,  are 
not  contained  in  the  Word  of  God  nor  in  the  Heidel- 
berg Catechism,  and  are  unedifying — yea,  danger- 
ous—  and  should  not  be  preached  to  Christian 
people." 

In  these  Five  Articles  we  have  set  forth  electioli 
and  condemnation,  conditioned  upon  the  faith  or 
unbelief  of  men  ;  the  atonement,  by  vicarious  or 
expiatory  offering,  was  not  to  be  esteemed  as  lim- 
ited to  any  definite  number,  but  was  made  sufficieut 
for  the  salvation  of  all  men  ;  man,  unaided  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  is  unable  to  come  to  God ;  all  the  in- 
fluences of  divine  grace  can  be  resisted  by  all  men, 
so  that  the  desire  of  God  for  the  individual  salva- 
tion of  a  person  may  be  defeated  ;   and  that  it  was 


70  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIS  T  Oil  Y. 

possible  for  a  believer,  ^vho  has  been  iu  full  sym- 
pathy with  God  and  accepted  of  him,  totally  to 
apostatize,  and  finally  fall  away  and  go  down  to 
eternal  damnation.  The  Remonstrants  declared 
these  Five  Articles  to  be  "in  harmony  with  the 
Word  of  God,  edifying,  and,  as  far  as  they  go,  suf- 
ficient for  salvation." 

Thus  were  brought  face  to  face  the  two  great 
systems  of  doctrines  as  antagonistic  to  each  other  as 
darkness  and  light ;  and  upon  the  issues  of  these, 
the  Calvinists  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Arminians 
on  the  other,  rested  their  faith.  The  Calvinists  de- 
manded the  support  of  the  State,  and  that  there 
should  not  be  toleration  of  other  seijtimcnts ;  the 
Arminians  demanded  that  there  should  be  perfect 
toleration,  and  that  the  State  should  not  decide  the 
one  or  the  other  as  being  true,  (^ilvinism  ever 
sought  for  an  alliance  with  and  aid  from  the  State  ; 
Arminianism  has  never  sought  for  an  alliance  with 
the  State,  or  special  aid  and  defense  from  the  State. 

In  the  Assembly  of  representatives  of  West  Hol- 
land and  Friesland  the  vote  was  overwhelmingly 
against  the  Arminians.  They  were  banished  from 
their  places ;  many  of  their  ministers  went  forth 
into  the  world  without  any  protection  whatever. 
"  The  victory  of  orthodoxy  was  obscured,"  says  Dr. 
Schaff,  "by  the  succeeding  deposition  of  about  two 
hundred  Arminian  clergymen,  and  by  the  preced- 
ing, though  independent,  arrest  of  the  political 
leaders  of  the   Remonstrants,  at   the  instigation  of 


A  It  1 21 NI A  N  LEA  DEES.  7 1 

Maurice."  As  we  have  already  seen,  Grotius  was 
condemned  to  perpetual  imprisonment,  but  escaped 
and  fled  to  France.  That  grand  old  statesman  and 
political  leader,  John  of  Baineveldt,  was  unjustly 
condemned  to  death  for  alleged  high  treason,  and 
beheaded  at  The  Hague,  March  14,  1619,  by  the 
direction  of  Prince  Maurice. 

"It  is  greatly  to  be  doubted  whether  this  vic- 
tory gained  over  the  Arminians,"  says  Mosheim, 
"  was,  upon  the  whole,  advantageous  or  detrimental 
to  the  Church  of  Geneva  in  particular,  and  the 
Reformed  Church  in  general.  It  is  at  least  certain 
that,  after  the  Synod  of  Dort,  the  doctrine  of  abso- 
lute decrees  lost  ground  from  day  to  day,  and  its 
patrons  were  put  to  the  hard  necessity  of  holding 
fraternal  communion  with  those  whose  doctrine  was 
either  professedly  Arminiuu,  or  at  least  nearly  re- 
sembled it.  The  leaders  of  the  vanquished  Armin- 
ians were  eminently  distinguished  for  their  elo- 
quence, sagacity,  and  learning ;  and  being  highly 
exasperated  by  the  injurious  and  oppressive  treat- 
ment which  they  met  with  in  consequence  of  their 
condemnation,  they  defended  themselves  and  at- 
tacked their  adversaries  with  such  spirit  and  vigoi', 
and  also  with  such  dexterity  and  eloquence,  that 
multitudes  were  persuaded  of  the  justice  of  their 
cause.  It  is  particularly  to  be  observed  that  the 
authority  of  the  Synod  of  Dort  was  far  from  being 
universally  acknowledged  among  the  Dutch ;  the 
provinces  of  Friesland,  Zealand,  Utrecht,  Guelder- 


72  ARMINIANISM  IN  IlIHTORY. 

laud,  and  Grouiugeu  could  not  be  persuaded  to 
adopt  its  decisions;  and  though,  in  the  year  1<)51, 
they  were  at  length  gained  over  so  far  as  to  inti- 
mate that  they  would  see  with  pleasure  the  Re- 
formed religion  maintained  upon  the  footing  on 
which  it  had  been  placed  and  confirmed  by  the 
Synod  of  Dort,  yet  the  most  eminent  adepts  in 
Belgic  jurisprudence  deny  that  this  intimation  had 
the  force  or  character  of  a  law."  (Mosheim,  Part 
II,  Sec.  2,  page  605,  Edition  of  Applegate  &  Co.) 


Chapter  IV. 

ARMINIAN  WRITERS. 

The  Second  Class  of  Arniinian  Writers— The  Revolt  from 
Calvinism  in  the  Netherlands— Stephen  Curcellfeus— 
Educated  at  Geneva— How  affected  by  the  Doctrines  of 
Arminianisni  Visit  to  the  Schools  of  Helvetia,  Turin, 
Basle,  and  Cologne— Godfrey— Ordained— Preacher  at 
Fontainebleau— Removed  to  Amiens— Refused  to  sub- 
scrilie  to  the  Canons  of  Dort— Contentions— Poelen- 
burg's  Funeral  Oration  on  Curcella;us— Senate  of  Ale- 
sia— Appeal  to  the  National  Synod— The  Articles  of  the 
National  Synod  of  France  -CurccUtieus  at  Amsterdam- 
Successor  of  Episcopius  as  Professor  of  Divinity  at  Am- 
sterdam—Leaning  towards  the  Grotian  View  of  the 
Atonement  —  Death  -  Philip  Van  Limborch  —  Rela- 
tive of  Episcopius  —  Student  at  Amsterdam  and 
Utrecht— Voetius—Liml)orch  a  Professor  of  Divinity 
at  Amsterdam  :  His  Literary  Character— Limborch's 
Systematic  Theology— Kitto's  Estimate  of  Limborch— 
Tlie  Remonstrants'  College— Its  Founding— Episcopius 
the  First  President— Successors  :  Curcella-us,  Poelen- 
burg,  Limborch,  LeClerc,  Van  Cattenburgh,  Wettstein— 
The  Remarks  of  Modern  European  Writers  on  Armin- 
ianisni—Hagenbach— Van  Oosterzee— Treatment  of  the 
Banished  Arminian  Preachers  — Spies  — Calder's  Ac- 
count— Na^ranus- Ryckewart— An  Old  Patriot  abused— 
Troops  fired  on  Arminian  Worshipers— Inhuman  Treat- 
ment of  the  Women— A  Religious  Service  held  on  the 
Ice— The  Worshipers  came  on  Skates— The  Ice  Bird. 

The  second  class  of  Arminiau  writers  were 
strong-minded,  thoroughly  cultured,  and  courage- 
ous men,  who,  becoming  jios.sessed  of  the  idea  that 

73 


74  ARiMINlANISJl  IN  HISTORY. 

Calvinism  was  an  error  and  that  the  doctrine.^  of 
Arminius  were  tenable,  were  willing  to  promulgate 
that  fact  to  the  world  at  all  times.  While  they  did 
not  always  express  themselves  in  the  same  terms, 
but  by  use  of  different  terms  seemed  to  advocate 
son)e  things  not  held  in  common,  yet  when  their 
writings  are  sifted,  collated,  and  compared,  there 
is  found  running  through  all  the  same  doctrines 
regai'ding  freedom  of  the  will,  original  sin,  cor- 
ruption of  the  race,  and  salvation  provided  so  as 
to  make  it  possible  for  all  men,  by  repentance  and 
faith,  to  come  to  a  knowledge  of  the  truth,  and  to 
eternal  salvation  in  Jesus  Christ. 

The  revolt  from  the  doctrine  of  Calvinism  was 
nearly  or  quite  as  great  in  the  Netherlands  as  the 
revolt  of  Luther  and  Melanchthon  from  the  Iloman 
Catholic  Church.  The  general  intelligence  was 
much  greater  among  the  Calvinists  at  this  time 
than  among  the  Romanists  when  Luther  revolted 
from  the  system  of  that  Church.  The  revolt  of 
Arminius,  Episcopius,  and  their  compeers  and  suc- 
cessors, was  greater,  in  its  intellectual  character, 
than  that  of  Luther  and  Zwiugli.  In  the  revolt  of 
Luther  and  Zwingli,  they  met  a  denser  ignorance 
and  a  greater  amount  of  impenetrable  superstition 
among  the  Roman  Catholics  than  the  Arn)iniaus 
met  when  they  came  in  contact  with  the  teachings 
of  the  Reformers.  The  fact  of  the  greater  intelli- 
gence must  be  recognized  as  a  factor  when  we  come 
to  consider  what  had  to   be  met  and   overcome  by 


A  R  MINI  AN  WBITERS.  75 

the  Arminians  in  their  attempt  to  obtain  toleration 
and  equal  privileges?  to  worship  God. 

Let  us  follow  the  lives  and  teachings  of  some 
of  the  more  prominent  successors  of  Arminius — the 
men  upon  whom  the  burden  rested  of  defending 
these  principles— and  discover  the  relations  they 
bore  to  each  other  in  a  common  conflict,  and  also 
learn  somewhat  of  the  estimate  more  recent  schol- 
ars have  placed  upon  their  work. 

Stephanus  Curcell^eus. 

Stephanas  Curcelhieus  was  a  strong  and  clear 
writer  of  dogmatic  theology  on  the  side  of  Armin- 
ianism.  His  voice  and  pen  were  heard  in  antag- 
onism to  the  rigid  and  unpalatable  doctrines  of 
John  Calvin.  He  was  born  at  Geneva,  that  center 
of  Calvinism,  April  30,  158G.  His  father  was  Fir- 
minius  Curcellreus,  a  citizen  of  Amiens,  whose 
death  occurred  very  soon  after  the  birth  of  his  son. 
A  brother  of  Stephanus  was  an  attorney  in  Amiens, 
and  possessed  such  force  of  eloquence  that  he 
"was  commonly  called  '  Chrysostom,'  '  the  Golden- 
mouthed.'"  Curcelheus  came  of  an  intellectual 
family,  which  had  suffered  much  in  the  Roman 
persecutions  for  the-  cause  of  Protestantism.  The 
education  of  Curcelheus  was  begun  and  carried  for- 
ward at  Geneva.  He  entered  the  "  Genevese  Stoa," 
and  faithfully  prosecuted  his  studies  in  history,  phi- 
losophy, and  science.  In  all  of  these  he  made 
rapid  and    solid  pi'Ogress.      Beza,   the   man  Avho  in- 


76  AR  311 NL 1  NIS.V  IN  1 1  IS  TO  R  Y. 

tensified  John  Calvin's  spirit,  was  his  first  teacher 
in  theology,  and  we  need  not  doubt  that  he  heard 
and  received  predestination  of  the  strongest  char- 
acter. He  remained  at  Geneva  for  a  number  of 
years,  enjoying  the  excellent  opportunity  for  study 
and  culture,  and  well  improved  his  time.  In  the 
independent  air  of  that  grand  Genevan  city  there 
was  something  that  thrilled  his  heart  and  stirred 
his  mind  to  recognize  the  greatness  of  God's  pro- 
visions for  human  salvation,  and  the  right  of  tol- 
eration in  matters  of  religion.  Feeling  the  need 
for  a  broader  view  of  the  world  of  letters,  he  re- 
ceived from  his  Genevan  instructors  a  strong  letter 
of  commendation,  in  which  they  spoke  of  his  great 
talents,  which  were  of  no  inferior  order,  and  the 
j)r()S[)ect  that,  under  the  blessing  of  God,  great 
fruits  would  result  to  the  world  fi-om  the  use  of 
such  talents.  Armed  with  this  excellent  letter  he 
started  upon  his  European  travels.  He  visited  the 
academies  of  Helvetia,  Turin,  Basle,  and  Cologne, 
remaining  at  each  for  a  season,  that  he  might 
learn  the  peculiarities  and  excellencies  of  each. 
After  this  he  went  to  Heidelberg,  where  he  re- 
mained a  longer  time,  and  became  intimately  ac- 
quainted with  the  justly  celebrated  Dionysius  Ciod- 
frey,  "  professor  juris,"  of  whose  learning  and  lectures 
he  speaks  in  the  highest  terms.  By  this  means 
Curcellanis  brought  into  close  connection  the  Re- 
formed and  the  Tjuthcran  theology.  These  he 
studied  in  parallel  columns,  and,  being  of  an  inde- 


ARM  INI  AN  WRITERS.  77 

pendent  cast  of  mind,  he  drew  his  own  conclusions 
as  to  the  Scripturalness  and  reasonableness  of  each. 
It  is  possible,  though  not  definitely  known,  that  it 
was  in  this  comparison  that  his  great  change  of 
mind  occurred,  in  which  he  determined  ultimately 
to  abandon  his  faith  in  a  limited  provision  for  sal- 
vation, and  turn  to  a  universal  provision  of  salva- 
tion in  Jesus  Christ. 

Having  returned  to  France  in  1614,  he  was  or- 
dained a  minister  and  placed  in  charge  of  Fon- 
tainebleau,  a  small  but  intelligent  congregation, 
which  grew  quite  rapidly,  under  his  careful  minis- 
trations. Often  the  King  of  France  was  found  in 
his  congregation,  with  many  of  his  courtiers;  for  he 
loved  to  visit  this,  the  place  of  his  birth  and  his 
early  home.  The  influence  of  Curcellseus  in  mat- 
ters of  religion  and  faith  grew  continually,  and  the 
circle  of  his  power  widened.  The  revolt  from  Cal- 
vinism had  begun,  and  as  his  mind  rested  upon 
the  provisions  for  salvation,  and  he  analyzed  care- 
fully the  Word  of  God,  and  saw  that  in  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Divine  Mind  there  was  the  recognition 
of  the  principle  of  reasonableness,  the  greater  the 
revolt  in  his  mind,  and  the  wider  became  the  breach 
between  him  and  Calvinism.  Rigid  predestination 
and  a  necessitated  will,  and  a  declaration  that  all 
men  were  guilty  of  Adam's  sin,  found  but  little 
upon  which  to  rest  as  a  sure  basis  when  he  came 
to  examine  the  Word  of  God. 

A¥hen  he  removed  to  Amiens  in  1621,  and  be- 


78  A  R  MINI  A  NISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

came  the  pastor,  he  refused  "to  subsci'ibe  to  the 
Canons  of  Dort."  The  Calvinists,  who  were  in 
the  ascendency,  compelled  him  to  resign  his  charge. 
His  friends,  who  greatly  prized  his  words  of  wis- 
dom and  eloquent  addresses,  interceded  with  him 
until  he  consented  to  assent  to  a  modified  form  of 
the  Creed  of  Dort.  This  having  been  accomplished, 
he  became  pastor  at  Verres,  in  Piedmont,  in  which 
Church  he  exercised  his  office  until  1634. 

The  mind  of  Curcellieus  was  active  in  an  effort 
to  stand  by  the  Creed  of  Calvin,  and  so  please 
some  of  his  warm  personal  friends ;  but  the  inner 
revolt  of  his  heart  continued.  "  The  doctrine  of  ab- 
solute predestination  "  filled  his  thoughts  and  har- 
assed his  soul  with  doubts  and  fears,  until  he  found 
that  he  could  not  continue  in  a  Church  where  he 
must  advocate  such  a  doctrine.  Turning  his  back 
upon  his  home  and  the  places  he  loved  in  the  Re- 
formed Church,  he  proceeded  to  Amsterdam,  and 
cast  his  lot  with  the  Remonstrants.  His  learning, 
candor,  and  gentleness  gave  him  reputation  among 
the  Amsterdam  Remonstrants  and  the  professors  in . 
the  college. 

That  we  may  have  a  clear  idea  of  how  this  the- 
ologian had  to  contend  for  his  convictions  regarding 
Arminianism,  as  also  how  other  Remonstrants  were 
persecuted  and  constantly  annoyed  by  the  intense 
and  dogmatic  Reformed,  I  will  quote  a  passage  from 
Arnold  Poelenburg's  "  Funeral  Oration  upon  Ste- 
phen Curcellseus."    "  When  this  reverent  man  was 


ARMINIAN  WRITERS  79 

installed  pastor  of  the  Church  at  Amiens,  about  the 
year  1621," says  Poeleuburg,  "the  dispute  concern- 
ing the  five  controverted  points  on  predestination 
was  raging,  and  had  extended  itself  even  to  the 
neighboring  nations ;  but  although  the  Synod  of 
Dort  decided  these  controversies  according  to  the 
wishes  of  our  adversaries  —  of  whom,  indeed,  it 
consisted — yet  the  flame  of  the  quarrel  was  not 
quenched,  but  it  blazed  more  furiously  even  than 
before.  In  Belgium,  after  this  decision  had  been 
made,  it  came  so  far  within  the  limits  of  modera- 
tion (if,  indeed,  it  could  be  called  moderation) 
that  unless  any  one  would  submit  to  the  Canons  of 
Dort,  he  could  not  remain  in  discharge  of  his  duties 
and  office  ;  but  in  France  (whence  no  one  had  been 
sent  to  the  Synod,  the  king  having  forbidden  this) 
the  matter  proceeded  so  far  that  an  oath  was  pre- 
scribed in  support  of  the  Canons  established  at 
Dort.  This  decree  was  given  in  the  Senate  at  Ale- 
sia,  Peter  Molineeus,  the  president,  especially  urg- 
ing it,  lest,  indeed,  his  anatomy  of  Armiuianism 
should  have  to  undergo  a  new  anatomizing.  Such 
a  decree,  so  very  cruel  and  most  atrocious,  I  think, 
from  the  first  days  of  Christianity  to  the  present 
time,  never  was  found  or  known  ;  for  not  only  did 
the  Judgment  of  Dort  establish  a  rule  of  faith,  but 
it  also  bound,  by  a  very  sacred  oath,  the  consciences 
of  the  pastors  to  a  promise,  given  in  their  own 
handwriting,  to  recognize  these  Canons  of  Dort  as 
divine,  and  true,  and  abiding,  even  to  the  last  mo- 


80  ARMINIA NISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

raent  of  their  lives.  To  tliiw  decree,  which  was  'en- 
acted in  a  National  Synod  in  the  year  1620,  not 
only  Curcellseus,  at  Amiens,  and  David  Blondellus, 
then  the  pastor  of  the  Church  at  Houda,  afterward 
the  professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  at  Amster- 
dam, but  all  the  ministers  of  that  diocese,  rendered 
earnest  opposition.  Here,  indeed,  this  solemn  cere- 
mony of  an  oath  was  abolished  ;  but  in  the  follow- 
ing year,  in  another  provincial  Synod,  a  new  in- 
strument was  formed,  by  which  all  were  constrained 
to  receive  the  faith  of  the  Canons,  but  without  the 
taking  of  an  oath.  Curcellseus,  perceiving  that  our 
opinion  would  be  rejected,  which  he  had  not  yet 
submitted  to  the  test  of  Scripture,  and  that  the  Re- 
monstrants would  be  condemned  as  guilty  of  schism, 
whom  he  believed  to  be  the  least  Avorthy  of  this 
accusation,  and  that  conscience  would  be  bound  by 
the  establishment  of  men  when  it  belonged  to  God 
alone,  declared  himself  unable  by  hand  or  mind  to 
yield  assent  to  it ;  and  soon  after  he  resigned  his 
office,  appealing  to  the  National  Synod,  soon  to  be 
celebrated  at  Charenton,  which  he  did  by  the  advice 
of  his  friends  and  relations,  influenced  by  some 
trickery  in  the  Synod,  who  threatened  that,  unless 
he  should  do  this  of  his  own  free  will,  the  Synod 
would  brand  him  with  the  severer  mark  of  igno- 
miny. But  when  this  Synod  was  held,  affairs  were 
grievously  disturbed  in  this  our  Belgium  ;  neither 
was  thei'e  a  place  of  refuge,  either  by  sea  or  land, 
or  a   gleaming  hope  of  ha})pier  times.     Some  like- 


ARMINIAN  WRITERS.  ■       81 

^vise  instilled  a  doubt  ia  his  mind  concerning  the 
foreknowledge  of  God,  upon  which  he  was  not  en- 
tirely settled,  and  from  which  stronghold  they  were 
attempting  to  overthrow  the  idea  of  God's  predes- 
tination. His  relations,  friends,  and  advisers,  with 
other  importunate  interferers,  added  their  influence, 
and  urged  his  wavering  and  doubtful  mind  that  he 
should  surrender  his  own  conscience  with  his  own 
handwriting,  into  servitude  to  certain  sacred  Can- 
ons, but  with  these  reservations  in  the  conditions : 
1,  That  he  should  not  be  held  as  condemning  the 
Remonstrants,  an  act  to  which  he  expressed  him- 
self very  averse ;  2.  That  he  could  not  wholly 
approve  these  Canons,  in  which  our  opinion  was 
rejected.  The  remaining  ones,  which  they  called  af- 
firmative, in  which  their  opinion  was  expressed,  he 
could  not  be  held  to  approve  in  the  same  sense  as 
the  partisans  of  Dort ;  for  the  Synod  having  omittted 
the  former,  published  the  latter  under  the  title, 
'Articles  adopted  at  the  National  Synod  of  the  Re- 
formed Church  of  France,  held  at  Charenton — 
printed  at  Paris.'  Finally,  he  declared  that  from 
Canon  XV,  chapter  i,  it  seemed  that  God  is  the 
author  of  sin."  (Methodist  Quarterly  Review,  1863, 
pp.  103,  104.) 

At  Amsterdam,  Curcelheus  became  an  intimate 
friend  of  Simon  Episcopius.  He  was  as  a  "brother 
beloved."  On  the  death  of  Episcopius,  he  became 
his  successor  as  professor  of  Divinity  in  Amsterdam 
College.     In  this  office  he  was  unusually  successful. 


82  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

His  great  mind  was  able  to  use  the  rich  stores  of 
information  it  had  gathered  in  past  years,  and 
pour  this  out  in  a  copious,  ever-flowing  stream  for 
the  instruction  and  edification  of  the  many  students 
who  assembled  in  that  honorable  city.  His  teach- 
ing was  recognized  by  the  Calvinists  as  unanswer- 
able, and  by  the  Remonstrants  as  a  strong  intrench- 
ment  of  their  doctrines.  While,  on  the  doctrine  of 
the  character  of  the  atonement,  he  leaned  some- 
what to  the  Grotian  view,  yet  he  set  a  special 
"emphasis  upon  the  sacrificial  character  of  the 
death  of  Christ  in  its  reference  to  God  as  well  as  to 
man,  asserting  that  Christ  made  satisfaction  for  sin, 
but  not  by  enduring  the  whole  punishment  due  to 
sinners."  Curcelheus  held  steadily  to  the  one  great 
thought  of  the  freedom  of  the  will  and  an  unlim- 
ited atonement.  He  sought  for  and  advocated  tol- 
eration. While  he  was  reared  and  educated  in  the 
hot-bed  of  anti-toleration  he  perceived  very  clearly 
the  nature  of  human  rights,  the  character  of  God's 
teachings,  individual  responsibility,  and  the  circum- 
stanstances  under  which  the  highest  intellectual  and 
spiritual  results  would  follow,  and  he  adopted  and 
advocated  the  doctrine  of  the  freest  toleration  of 
all  sects. 

When  the  death-hour  came,  in  1659,  he  ex- 
claimed: "My  God,  my  Father!  for  this  hour  all 
things  are  well.  I  am  calmly  composed — I  am  ex- 
ultant !"  Thus  this  great  Remonsti-ant  teacher 
passed  away. 


ARMINIAN  WRITERS.  83 

Remonstrants'  College  at  Amsterdam. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  speak  of  the  Remon- 
strants' College  in  Amsterdam,  founded  in  1634  by 
the  action  and  sacrificing  of  the  Remonstrants,  Si- 
mon Episcopius  was  called  from  Rotterdam  to  act 
as  Divinity  professor.  His  lectures  to  the  stu- 
dents were  published,  after  his  death,  under  the 
title  of  "Theological  Institutes."  The  principles 
ujjon  which  Episcopius  lectured  are  well  stated  in 
his  Memoirs  :  "In  this  work  he  not  only  proposed 
to  investigate  the  truth  of  every  Christian  doctrine, 
but  also  to  ascertain  its  importance.  This  he  did 
with  a  design  of  preparing  the  way  for  exhibiting 
the  common  ground  on  which  the  peace  and  unity 
of  the  Christian  Church  might  be  founded.  The- 
ologians in  general  are  accustomed  to  hold  it  to 
be  sufficient  to  demonstrate  the  truth  of  their  doc- 
trines, and  prove  the  falsehood  or  heterodoxy  of 
others,  merely  for  the  purpose  of  showing  why  they 
ought  not  to  separate  from  the  parties  whose  opin- 
ions do  not  accord  with  their  own.  Episcopius 
thought  differently,  and  asserted  that  it  was  pos- 
sible for  divines  and  Christians  to  have  a  diversity 
of  opinions  and  yet  hold  Church  fellowship,  or,  at 
least,  to  cultivate  friendly  intercourse  with  each 
other.  This  he  attemj^ted  to  prove  by  showing  that 
the  points  debated  among  orthodox  Christians  were 
not  such  as  to  place  the  party  who  maintained  an 
opinion  opposite  to    the  other  in  a    situation  that 


84  ARMINIANISM  IM  HISTOR  Y. 

might  eudanger  his  safety ;  but,  on  the  contrary, 
holding  and  publicly  confessing  all  the  great  points 
of  truth  necessary  to  salvation,  they  were  bound 
by  the  dictates  of  Christianity  to  cherish  the  prin- 
ciples of  concord  and  brotherly  aflection."  (Me- 
moirs of  Simon  Episeopius,  pp.  423,  424.) 

The  gentle  spirit  of  Episeopius  manifested  it- 
self in  his  great  desire  to  bring  all  people  profess- 
ing Christianity  into  the  spirit  of  friendship  and 
union.  AVhile  preparing  his  work  and  giving  it  to 
his  classes  and  to  the  world,  this  grand  object  was 
never  lost  sight  of  for  a  moment.  "In  endeavor- 
ing to  effect  this,  he  first  examined  a  doctrinal 
point,  to  determine  its  character.  This  prepared 
the  way  for  him  to  show  how  far  there  must  be  an 
agreement  of  opinion  upon  it  in  order  to  maintain 
union  and  fellowship,  and,  by  consequence,  to  what 
extent  diversity  of  sentiment  might  be  allowed  be- 
fore the  great  bonds  of  union  should  be  broken 
down,  and  a  person  be  pronounced  unsuitable  for 
Christian  communion.  It  was  his  design  to  bring 
to  this  trial  every  doctrinal  subject,  in  order  to 
show  that  all  those  who  separated  from  the  Church 
of  Rome,  and  maintained  orthodox  principles, 
might  agree  ui)on  the  great  and  weighty  doctrines 
of  our  common  Christianity."     (Memoirs,  p.  424.) 

The  line  of  successors  in  the  professorship  of  Di- 
vinity at  Amsterdam  is  worthy  of  record  and  study. 
Simon  Episeopius,  Stephauus  Curcellneus,  Arnold 
Poelenburg,  Philip  Limborch,  John  LeClerc,  Adrian 


ARMINIAN  WRITERS.  85 

Van  Cattenburgh,  John  James  Wettstein,  follow  in 
a  line  of  succession  as  glorious  in  its  character  and  as 
religious  in  its  spirit  as  it  was  high  and  exalted  in  its 
intellectual  character.  These  were  men  of  great 
culture,  strong  common  sense,  high  natural  ability, 
and  intensity  of  purpose.  They  were  not  mediocres 
in  any  sense  whatever,  but  men  of  brain,  heart, 
conscience,  and  conviction.  They  were  men  who 
held  constant  communion  with  heaven,  and  lived 
under  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Such  men 
left  their  sensible  impress  upon  the  great  revolt 
from  Calvinism  which  took  its  form  from  Armin- 
ianism.  Long  may  their  memory  live,  and  their 
deeds  and  doctrines  be  held  in  the  highest  esteem !" 

Modern  Writers  and  Arminianism. 

How  have  modern  European  and  other  writers 
esteemed  Arminianism  and  its  influence  ?  Schleier- 
macher  has  used  this  language:  "The  Arminian 
principle,  which  renounced  the  authority  of  the  sym- 
bolical books,  gave  such  an  impulse  to  exegetical  in- 
vestigation, to  independent  hermeneutical  labors, 
and  to  the  speculative  treatment  of  theology,  that, 
in  consequence  of  the  influence  exerted  by  the 
works  of  Episcopius  and  Hugo  Grotius,  it  was  in- 
troduced into  the  whole  Evangelical  Church.  Thus 
a  general  desire  manifested  itself  in  the  Protestant 
Church  of  Germany  to  do  away  with  the  authority 
of  the  symbolical  books."  (From  Hagenbach,  Vol. 
H,  p.  216.) 


86  ARMINIANI8M  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

Within  the  ranks  of  Calvinism  have  been  many 
who  revolted  at  the  harsh  doctrines  of  iron-bound 
decrees.  "As  early  as  the  lifetime  of  Calvin  him- 
self," says  Hagenbach,  "Sebastian  Castello  and  Ge- 
rome  Bolsec,  both  of  Geneva,  raised  their  voices 
against  the  Calvinistic  docrine,  but  did  not  produce 
any  impression.  The  more  moderate  view  of  Ar- 
minius  and  his  followers  always  had  secret  adher- 
ents in  the  Reformed  Church  itself."  (Hagenbach, 
paragraph  250.) 

In  speaking  of  some  of  the  peculiarities  of  Ar- 
minianism,  Winer  says  :  "The  Arminians  supposed 
a  constant  co-operation  of  the  human  will,  awak- 
ened by  Divine  grace,  with  that  grace  ;•  but,  in  their 
opinion,  the  influence  of  the  latter  is  by  no  means 
merely  of  a  moral  nature.  It  is  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  accompanying  the  Word  of  God  which 
exerts  an  influence  upon  the  mind  and  is  super- 
natural as  regards  its  nature,  but  analogous  to  the 
natural  power  of  all  truth  as  regards  the  mode  of 
its  operation."     (Quoted  by  Hagenbach,  Sec.  249.) 

Van  Oosterzee  has  these  words  in  reference  to 
Arminianism :  "  We  find  at  this  period  the  study 
of  dogmatics  carried  on  by  the  Arminians  from  their 
standpoint  with  much  zeal  and  skill.  Among  the 
dogmatists  of  this  school  stand  out  in  particular 
Episcopius,  Curcelkeus,  and  Philip  Limborch,  whose 
theology  has  not  incorrectly  gained  the  renown  of 
being  Biblical,  irenical,  and  practical.  We  see 
these  men,  while  relatively  free  from  scholasticism, 


ARMINIAN  WRITERS.  87 

tread  a  more  exegetical  path,  guided  by  the  light 
of  Hugo  Grotius,  their  most  distinguished  apolo- 
gist and  commentator.  Even  where  we  can  not  ad- 
mit their  premises,  we  can  hardly  deny  that  their 
method  is  far  superior  to  that  of  many  other  con- 
temporaries. We  must,  at  least,  call  it  unjust  to 
name  them,  as  has  often  been  done,  in  the  same 
breath  as  the  Socinians,  though  we  can  not  deny 
that  at  least  their  later  representatives  have  been 
also  the  forerunners  of  rationalism."  (Van  Ooster- 
zee's  Christian  Dogmatics,  p.  42.) 

Treatment  of  Banished  Preachers. 

The  treatment  received  by  the  banished  preach- 
ers of  the  Netherlands,  who  were  driven  out  by  the 
action  of  the  Synod  of  Dort  when  they  repudiated 
Arminianism,  and  the  treatment  which  their  families 
received  from  the  same  source,  and  the  meek  and 
kindly  spirit  in  which  it  was  met  and  endured  by 
these  Remonstrants,  are  evidences  of  the  intolerant 
character  of  the  Reformed,  and  the  gentler  spirit 
of  the  Arminians.  It  was  decided  that  whatever 
banished  minister  returned  should  be  seized  and 
imprisoned,  or  banished  again,  without  the  oppor- 
tunity of  ever  visiting  his  beloved  home.  He  must 
wander  an  exile  on  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  die 
unloved  and  unrespected.  Spies  were  paid  for 
hunting  down  those  who  were  suspected  of  return- 
ing to  their  homes.  Large  rewards  were  given  to 
individuals  who  detected  persons,  either  in  allowing 


88  ARM1NIANIS3I  IN  HISTORY. 

public  services  to  be  held  in  their  houses,  or  those 
who  were  present  at  such  assemblies,  or  found  in 
any  way  by  their  public  conduct  to  sanction  the 
cause  of  Arminianisni.  "  One  proclamation  fol- 
lowed another,"  says  Calder,  "each  more  severe 
than  the  last,  imposing  fines  upon  those  who  dared 
to  meet  for  such  a  purpose,  while  to  harbor  an 
Arminian  minister,  or  show  him  any  act  of  kind- 
ness, or  suffer  him  to  perform  any  religious  duty 
in  a  family,  to  pray  with  a  dying  person,  exposed 
the  head  of  it  to  the  heaviest  fines,  and  such  min- 
isters to  imprisonment  or  banishment.  Persons 
known  either  to  collect  or  contribute  money  to  the 
support  of  the  deprived  or  banished  ministers  were 
visited  with  the  heaviest  penalties." 

"The  wife  of  Nieranus,  an  Arminian  clergy- 
man, when  dying,  petitioned  the  magistrates  of  the 
city  to  allow  her  husband  to  come  and  visit  her  be- 
fore her  death,  which  was  refused.  This  occasioned 
spies  to  be  constantly  around  her  house,  and  even 
to  get  up  to  the  windows  to  look  into  the  dying 
woman's  room,  supposing  that  if  her  husband  heard 
of  her  state,  his  affection  would  prompt  him  at  all 
risk  to  come  to  her  bedside.  But  he  was  unac- 
quainted with  her  condition,  and  therefore  they 
were  disappointed." 

"  Ryckewart,  one  of  the  cited  ministers  who 
was  banished,  having  got  to  hear  that  his  wife  was 
dying,  and  that  her  request  to  allow  him  to  visit 
her  was  not  granted,  hastened  to  see  her,  though  he 


ARMINIAN  WRITERS.  89 

made  himself  liable  to  perpetual  imprisonment  by 
returning  into  Holland,  and,  after  traveling  to  the 
place  where  she  resided,  got  some  friend  to  put  him 
into  a  very  large  basket  or  wicker  hamper,  and 
carry  him  in  open  day  to  her  house,  where  he 
staid  with  her  till  she  died."  (Memoirs  of  Epis- 
copius,  p.  363.) 

"A  venerable  man,  an  inhabitant  of  Leyden, 
who  was  detected  in  allowing  a  meeting  to  be  held 
in  his  house,  and  in  contributing  to  the  support  of 
the  exiled  Remonstrant  ministers,  was  summoned 
before  the  magistrates,  banished  the  town,  and  con- 
demned in  a  fine  of  one  thousand  gold  reals  for 
suffering  this  meeting  to  be  held  ;  then  in  six  hun- 
dred guilders  for  collecting  money  for  the  ministers, 
and  twenty-five  more  for  refusing  to  declare  the 
names  of  those  who  were  present  at  the  meeting. 
This  man,  it  should  be  understood,  had  long  been 
attached  to  the  doctrines  of  Arminius,  and  so  early 
as  1574,  when  the  town  of  Leyden  was  besieged  by 
the  Spaniards,  he  was  one  of  those  who,  on  that  oc- 
casion, not  only  took  part  with  his  fellow-citizens 
in  that  display  of  courage  and  endui-ance  of  suflTer- 
ing,  of  which  nothing  in  the  annals  of  modern  his- 
tory furnishes  any  parallel,  but  also  rendered  other 
essential  services  in  the  defense  of  the  city,  through- 
out the  whole  of  the  trying  period  of  the  siege." 
(Calder,  p.  364.) 

The  stories  told  by  creditable  historians  of  the 
savagery  of    these   times  are  almost    beyond  ere- 


90  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

dence.  Some  of  them  rival  the  atrocities  of  a  few 
years  before,  when  Spanish  Catholics,  under  Alva 
and  his  minions,  fired  upon  the  defenseless  Protest- 
ants, beat  out  the  brains  of  many,  piked,  hung, 
and  burned  others.  The  Counter-Remonstrant 
party  hated,  hunted,  and  destroyed  the  peaceful 
men  of  the  Remonstrant  party.  Calvinist  Protest- 
ants were  destroying  Armiuian  Protestants. 

Persecution  can  not  always  put  a  stop  to  the 
preaching  of  a  pure  gospel  and  the  growth  of  the 
Church.  This  was  true  in  Holland.  "Although  the 
Arminians  were  prohibited  holding  public  worship, 
nevertheless,  unawed  by  the  threatened  severity  of 
the  proclamations,  they  held  their  religious  meet- 
ings," says  one  of  the  writers,  "  throughout  the 
whole  of  the  United  Provinces,  and  especially  in 
Holland.  They  were  held  in  towns  and  villages,  in 
houses  and  barns,  in  garrets  and  cellars,  in  fields 
and  highways,  in  streets  and  gardens.  This  con- 
tumacy, as  it  was  called,  was  highly  off^ensive  to 
the  bigoted  Counter- Remonstrant  magistrates  and 
clergy  ;  and  Maurice,  though  he  did  not  assume  the 
name  of  sovereign  after  Barneveldt's  assassination, 
was  as  absolute  in  his  dictum  as  any  Eastern  despot, 
and,  at  the  request  of  the  magistrates  he  had 
created  in  the  place  of  the  Remonstrants,  sent 
troops  to  enable  them  to  suppress  these  assemblies. 
The  reader  may  judge  of  the  strength  of  the  Ar- 
minians in  Rotterdam,  when  he  is  informed  that  the 
first  time  they  held  a  meeting,  in  a  field  some  few 


ARMINIAN  WRITERS.  91 

miles  from  the  town,  not  less  than  five  thousand  of 
them  assembled  to  hear  preaching.  The  Calvinist 
party  were  enraged  at  this,  and  determined  to  take 
vengeance  the  next  Sunday.  After  keeping  the 
gates  of  the  city  closed  to  a  period  far  beyond  the 
usual  hour,  two  troops  of  English  and  Scotch  sol- 
diers were  led  out  to  disperse  about  two  thousand 
persons  who  had  met  to  hear  a  sermon,  on  which 
occasion  they  fired  upon  the  people.  Some  were 
killed,  and  others  received  serious  wounds,  of  which 
they  afterwards  died.  Several  gentlemen,  with  the 
muzzles  of  the  soldiers  pointed  at  their  breasts, 
were  robbed  of  their  purses,  the  ladies  stripped  of 
their  jewels  and  rings,  while  others  were  treated  in 
a  way  not  to  be  named  ;  and  what  forms  the  dark- 
est picture  of  the  scene,  was  the  fact  of  some  of 
the  Calvinistic  clergy  viewing  it  from  the  tops  of 
their  churches  by  the  aid  of  their  perspective 
glasses,  and  wantonly  enjoying  these  deeds  of  blood 
and  slaughter."  (Memoirs  of  Episcopius,  pp. 
367-368.) 

These  courageous  Christians,  followers  of  the 
doctrines  of  Arminius,  who  was  only  restoring  the 
apostolical  faith,  found  ways  of  eluding  the  cruel 
persecutoi'S,  and  enjoying  a  season  of  refreshing 
worship.  ' '  Toward  the  latter  end  of  the  year,  in 
consequence  of  the  usual  rains  which  fell  at  that 
season,  the  people  were  prevented  from  holding 
their  meetings  in  the  fields,  but  as  soon  as  the  frost 
set  in,  they  took  their  skates,  and  in  vast  numbers 


92  A  R^IINIANISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

flew  to  some  distance,  and  celebrated  divine  wor- 
ship on  the  ice  uninterruj)ted,  for  no  civil  officer  or 
soldier  could  overtake  any  number  of  persons  thus 
provided  with  the  means  of  escape  over  a  vast  ex- 
tent of  country,  submerged  in  water,  which  was 
frozen  over  at  this  period  of  the  year.  Here  the 
people  joyfully  and  undisturbed  sang  their  psalms, 
and  listened  with  attention  to  their  minister's  ser- 
mon, after  which  a  certain  number  of  them  always 
accompanied  him  on  their  skates  to  his  home.  One 
of  these  engaged  in  this  service  was  a  favorite  with 
the  people,  and  went  by  the  name  of  "  The  Ice 
Bird."  The  magistrates,  in  order  to  bring  contempt 
on  the  labors  of  these  devoted  pastor§,  called  their 
field-preaching  "Hedge  Sermons."  (Memoirs  of 
Episcopius,  pp.  370-371.) 

God  seemed  to  have  a  great  work  for  these 
sturdy  Dutch  Arminians  to  perform,  and  when 
their  way  seemed  hedged  up  he  opened  new  ways, 
and  gave  them  the  courage  of  the  martyrs. 


Chapter  V. 

DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES. 

Vigilant  Enemies  of  Arminianisra — Theodore  Beza — Theo- 
logical Conditions  at  the  Time  of  the  Controversy — Cal- 
-vinism  Supreme  in  the  Reformed  Church — A  Standing 
Menace  to  Rome  —  Predestination  before  Augustine  — 
New  Testament  Idea  of  Predestination  —  Pelagius,  the 
Monk  of  Wales — Met  Augustine  at  Hippo — Augustine— 
Gottschalk — Luther  and  Melanchthon  repudiated  Pre- 
destination—  John  Calvin  —  Calvin's  Master  Works  — 
Zvvingli— The  Genius  of  Calvin — Students  went  to  Ge- 
neva to  study — IModification  in  Calvinism — Doctrine  as 
taught  by  Arminius — Statements  of  Dr.  W.  F.  Warren — 
Quotations  from  the  Works  of  Arminius — First  Aspect 
of  Predestination  —  Reasons  for  rejecting  Calvinism  — 
Second  Aspect  of  Supralapsariauism  —  Reasons  against 
it — Third  Phase,  or  Sublapsarianism — Reasons  against 
.  it^ — Watson's  Teaching — Some  made  a  Cloak  of  Armin- 
ianism  to  teach  Heretical  Doctrines — Arminianism  in 
Contact  with  Socinianism — Arminianism  in  Contact  with 
Pelagianisni — Arminianism  holds  to  a  Trinity — Value 
of  Arminianism  to  the  World — Dr.  Copleston's  View  of 
Arminianism. 

When  the  principles  advocated  by  James  Ar- 
minius were  publicly  put  forth  by  him,  there  were 
vigilant  enemies  who  attacked  him  in  character  and 
teachings,  denouncing  him  in  bitter  terms,  and  the 
controversy  was  of  an  exceedingly  stirring  charac- 
ter. From  Geneva,  Theodore  Beza,  ujjon  whose 
shoulders  the  mantle  of  Calvin  had  fallen,  sent  his 
7  93 


94  AR3IINIA  NISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

protest  and  disputants  to  meet  and  counteract,  as 
far  as  possible,  the  work  of  Arminius  and  his  fol- 
lowers. Gomarus  a  professor  of  Theology  at  Ley- 
den,  and  companion  in  labor  with  Arminius,  was 
especially  active  and  bitter  in  his  attacks  upon  the 
man  and  his  teachings.  All  the  force  of  argument, 
the  plea  for  age  and  venerableness  of  Calvinism, 
and  the  influence  of  State  authority  was  brought  to 
bear  against  the  apostle  of  salvation  possible  for  all 
men.  But  Arminius  stood  firm,  grounded  in  the 
well-known  principles  adopted  by  him  when  fully 
convinced  by  the  writings  of  Koornhert. 

Historical  Review  of  Theological  Conditions. 

I.  The  theological  conditions  before  and  at  the 
time  of  the  controversy  prepared  the  way  for  Armini- 
anism. 

Calvinism  reigned  supreme  in  the  Reformed 
Church.  It  had,  by  its  own  force,  been  able  to 
rally  around  itself  a  large  number  of  followers,  un- 
til a  Church  was  founded  whose  object  was  to 
advocate  the  principles  of  Calvinism,  and  stand 
against  the  encroachments,  aggressive  efforts,  and 
tyranny  of  Romanism.  Geneva  and  other  Swiss  can- 
tons were  fully  under  the  domination  of  Calvinism. 
Somewhat  feebly  her  authority  was  felt  in  France. 
Along  the  water-way  of  the  lower  Rhine  into  the 
Netherlands,  her  power  was  more  fully  felt  and 
authority  recognized.  She  had  leaped  the  North 
Sea  and  made  a  home  in  Scotland,  and  was  reach- 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  95 

ing  down  to  take  in  the  English  heart.  Every- 
where Calvinism  was  a  standing  menace  to  Rome, 
and  kept  in  check  her  unholy  ambition.  In  this 
respect  she  is  worthy  of  the  highest  praise  from  all 
Protestantism.  Her  many  Creeds  and  Confessions 
of  Faith  were  sturdy  blows  against  the  mother  of 
harlots,  and  demonstrated  to  the  world  that  the  Re- 
formed faith  was  gaining  ascendency.  Pelaglanism 
had  never  founded  a  denomination  or  society,  but 
infested  portions  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church, 
and  was  beginning  to  find  its  way  into  the  Reformed 
Church,  whose  influence  could  negative  its  teach- 
ings as  far  as  possible.  Socinus  had,  by  the  force 
of  his  eloquence,  carried  away,  especially  in  Poland 
and  Hungary,  several  societies  from  the  Roman 
Church,  and  had  founded  some  new  societies  which 
held  and  advocated  his  doctrines.  His  system  was 
skillfully  stated,  and  his  adherents  carried  on  the 
work  with  a  degree  of  success,  but  they  lacked  the 
enthusiasm  and  consistency  of  both  the  Lutheran 
and  Reformed  Churches. 

1.  "Before  the  time  of  Augustine,  the  unani- 
mous doctrine  of  the  Church  Fathers,  so  far  as 
scientifically  developed  at  all,  Avas  that  the  Divine 
decrees  as  to  the  fate  of  the  individual  men  were 
conditioned  upon  their  faith  and  obedience  as  fore- 
seen in  the  Divine  Mind,  In  the  first  ministry  of 
Augustine  he  hinted  at  nothing  else.  Man's  faith 
and  obedience  in  Jesus  Christ  were  accepted  by  the 
Father,   and  the  sinner  was  justified."     Such  was 


96  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

the  New  Testament  doctrine  in  which  "  is  a  remark- 
able anticipation  of  the  modern  controversy."  "  In 
Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Komans,"  says  Pope,  "the 
apostle  to  the  Gentiles  argues  against  these  advo- 
cates of  an  unconditional  election,  these  earliest 
perverters  of  the  true  doctrine  of  the  decretive 
will  of  God.  It  must  be  always  remembered  that 
this  was  the  object  with  which  he  wrote  the  three 
chapters  in  which  the  Predestinarians  have  taken 
refuge;  they  were  written,  in  fact,  as  a  proleptical 
refutation  of  such  views.  .  .  .  St.  Paul  admits  .  ,  . 
that  the  ancient  election  was  of  a  particular  line, 
through  which  the  revelation  of  the  preparatory 
Gospel  was  to  be  transmitted,  and  in  which  the 
author  of  that  Gospel  was  to  appear.  Undoubtedly 
it  is  hard  for  human  reason  to  distinguish  between 
the  national  and  individual  election,  and  between 
the  active  and  persuasive  will  of  God,  in  the  harden- 
ing of  evil  men  ;  but  the  distinction  must  be  made." 
(Pope,  Vol.  II,  p.  348.)  The  entire  early  Church, 
from  Paul  to  Augustine,  "knew  in  its  doctrine  no 
other  election  and  predestination  than  what  was 
conditional."  The  eloquent  Chrysostom  said:  "Not 
of  love  alone,  but  of  our  virtue  also.  If  it  sprang 
of  love  alone,  all  would  have  been  saved.  If  from 
our  virtue  alone,  that  would  be  little,  and  all  would 
be  lost.  It  was  from  neither  alone,  but  from  both  ; 
for  the  calling  was  not  of  necessity  or  of  force," 
(Pope,  Vol.  II,  page  349.) 

2.  Pelagius,    the    Monk    of   Wales,     wandered 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  97 

from  England  to  the  Continent,  thence  to  Northern 
Italy,  and  finally  down  to  Rome.  He  had  become 
filled  with  the  idea  that  man  had  sufficient  moral 
power,  when  exercised,  to  enable  him  to  please  God, 
receive  forgiveness  for  whatever  sins  he  might  com- 
mit, and  enable  him  to  live  in  a  state  of  innocent 
purity,  and  at  last  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
In  this  system  no  Christ's  atoning  sacrifice  was 
needed.  Pelagius  wandered  over  to  Africa,  and 
came  to  Hippo,  where  Augustine  was  bishop. 
Very  soon  the  controversy  between  Augustine  and 
Pelagius  opened,  and  was  carried  forward  with  great 
spirit. 

3.  Augustine,  seeing  that  Pelagius  gave  no 
honor  or  credit  to  the  grace  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ 
for  human  salvation,  and  believing  that  Pelagius 
thereby  wholly  ignored  both  the  necessity  for  and 
fact  of  a  Christ  as  a  sacrifice  and  mediator,  "with 
a  view  to  enhance  the  glory  of  grace,"  said  unequiv- 
ocally, **  that  the  salvation  of  the  elect  depends 
upon  the  bare  will  of  God,  and  that  his  decree  to  save 
those  whom  he  chooses  to  save  is  unconditional."  The 
inflexible  principle  advocated  by  Augustine  was, 
*'  Predestination  is  the  preparation  of  grace  ;  grace 
the  bestowmeut  itself."  His  whole  system  radiated 
from  this. 

4.  Gottschalk,  about  840  A.  D.,  taught  the  un- 
conditional reprobation  or  unconditional  predesti- 
nation of  the  uncalled  and  unsaved.  He  completed 
what   Augustine   left  out,  to  make  a  system  that 


98  AR311NIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

should  be  complete  on  that  basis.  The  dogma' of 
Gottschalk  was  repudiated  at  Maiuz  (A,  D.  848) ; 
at  Valence  (A.  D.  855),  it  received  approval. 
"  On  the  side  of  Gottschalk  was  Ratramnus  ;  against 
him  Hinckmar.  It  may  be  said  that,  throughout 
the  mediaeval  discussions  of  this  and  kindred  sub- 
jects, the  tendency  was  in  a  direction  opposite  to 
that  of  predestinarianism ;  and,  moreover,  that 
the  ever-growing  theory  of  a  kingdom  of  ^^Christ, 
under  one  vicar,  predestined  to  embrace  the  world, 
was  itself  unfavorable  to  any  limitations  of  the  gos- 
pel vocation.  The  mediieval  Church,  at  the  worst, 
was  in  spirit  and  practice  missionary.  Unions  of 
missions  and  a  partial  call  can  never  rationally  co- 
exist." (Pope,  Vol.  II,  p.  351.)  Where  these  two 
theories,  that  of  Augustine  and  that  of  Gottschalk, 
are  joined  in  one,  as  they  were  by  John  Calvin,  we 
have  all  the  elements  and  the  essence  of  Calvinism. 
When  men  have  embraced  this  theory  as  the  only 
solution  of  the  problem  of  Avill  and  of  salvation, 
they  will  encompass  sea  and  land  to  advocate  their 
doctrine,  and  plant  their  principles  to  live  forever. 
5.  Luther  and  Melanchthon,  when  they  first 
entered  upon  the  Reformation  of  Germany,  ac- 
cepted the  Augustine  theory.  It  was  not  long  be- 
fore they  discovered  that,  accepting  Augustine's  pre- 
destination to  salvation  of  a  portion  of  mankind 
unconditioually,  required  that  they  should  also  accept 
Gottschalk's  predestination  of  the  other  portion  of 
mankind  to  eternal  perdition  unconditionally.    These 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  99 

two  liberal-minded  men,  whose  hearts  yearned  for 
the  salvation  of  their  fellow-men  and  for  the  com- 
plete elevation  of  their  loved  Germany,  started 
back  with  horror  from  such  a  conclusion,  and 
returned  to  the  "primitive  doctrine  of  conditional 
election."  Melauchthon,  more  radically  than  Luther, 
stood  for  the  primitive  thought  and  against  uncon- 
ditional predestination.  The  Lutherans  generally 
follow  Melanchthon. 

6.  John  Calvin,  at  Geneva,  taught  in  the  strong- 
est terms  "  unconditional  election  and  reprobation," 
and  built  his  entire  theological  system  upon  this  as 
a  basis.  His  master-work,  "  Institutes  of  Chris- 
tian Religion,"  is  a  monument  to  his  great  mind 
and  wonderful  industry,  at  the  same  time  serving 
to  intensify  the  wonder  why  so  great  a  mind  could 
have  been  led  into  so  gi-eat  an  error.  He  who  en- 
dured such  persecutions  as  fell  to  Calvin's  lot  in 
Paris  and  France,  and  whose  great  heart  yearned 
for  the  salvation  of  his  French  people,  one  would 
have  supposed,  must  have  desired  a  greater  breadth  of 
freedom  in  the  coming  to  the  Lord  for  salvation  than 
is  represented  in  his  system.  How  or  why  he 
adopted  so  narrow  a  plan  of  salvation,  or  bounded 
the  mercy  of  God  to  sinners  as  he  did,  is  an  unex- 
plained problem  that  the  Arminian  mind  can  not 
fathom.  ' '  Zwiugli  and  Calvin,"  says  Pope,  ' '  united 
in  reviving  the  Augustiuian  doctrine  of  an  individual 
vocation  determined  by  a  predestinating  decree;  but 
Calvin  has  given  a  permanent  name  to  the  system. 


100  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

because,  in  fact,  lie  gave  it  a  distinguishing  char- 
acter. He  laid  his  foundation  deeper  than  that  of 
his  forerunner.  Augustine  made  the  eternal  decree 
his  central  point ;  Calvin  carried  it  up  to  the  Ab- 
solute Being,  or  Absolute  Sovereignty  of  God,  from 
which  that  decree  flowed.  '  Man,'  said  Calvin,  '  falls 
by  the  providence  of  God  so  ordaining,  but  he  falls 
through  his  own  wickedness.'  All  is  of  the  abso- 
lute, unquestionable,  despotic  Sovereignty  of  God. 
If  hunum  reason  suggests  a  demur,  '  Respondendum 
est  quia  voluit' — It  is  answered,  so  he  wills.  The 
decree  was  Supralapsarian  ;  that  is,  it  included  the 
Fall,  which  Augustine  never  asserts  formally.  It 
follows  from  this  in  the  system  of  Calvin  that  the 
external  call  of  the  gospel  is  unmeaning  ceremo- 
nial, save  as  to  the  elect.  The  word  and  the  means 
of  grace  are  to  all  others  *  Signa  inania,'  the  mani- 
festations of  a  '  Voluntas  signi,'  which,  signifying 
nothing  but  a  common  grace,  must  be  distinguished 
from  the  hidden  '  Voluntas  beneplaciti,'  on  which 
the  salvation  of  every  man  depends.  Here  is  the 
secret  of  predestinarianism,  whatever  other  name  it 
may  bear,  the  secret  that  links  it  with  fatalism, 
with  philosophic  determinism,  with  Pantheism,  with 
the  modern  notion  of  abstract  law,  or  the  abso- 
lute fiat  of  a  being  who  is  not  so  much  a  person 
as  a  will.  Other  relations  of  this  creed  to  theo-> 
logical  doctrine,  subordinate  relations  introduced  in 
due  course,  all  find  their  vanishing  point  in  this 
Unconditional    and     Unconditioned     Sovereignty, 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  101 

which  is  the  foundation  and   topstone  of  the  whole 
Buperstructure."     (Pope,  Vol.  II,  pp.  351-352.) 

Modifications  in  Calvinism. 

Modifications  in  Calvinism  have  occurred  in  all 
lands  and  ages,  wherever  it  has  traveled.  In  France 
Amyraldus  revolted,  and  was  forced  to  teach  that, 
in  providing  salvation,  God  made  provisions  for  all 
men,  but  he  elected  to  give  to  a  limited  number 
the  "grace  of  repentance  and  faith,"  and  left ,the 
jiest-Jffiithout  any  determining  influence.  Richard 
Baxter  taught  the  same  in  England.  The  same 
was  heard  in  Scotland.  Even  Calvin  himself  fore- 
saw the  revolt  from  his  predestination  theory,  and 
sought  to  deter  men  from  it.  It  is  the  same  spirit 
of  revolt  that  within  the  past  decade  set  Calvinism 
to  seek  a  change  in  the  Creed. 

The  genius  of  Calvin  made  his  doctrine  felt  far 
and  wide.  The  men  who  rallied  around  his  stan- 
dard labored  hard  to  intensify  it.  That  most  re- 
markable man,  Theodore  Beza,  was  his  coadjutor  and 
successor  in  theological  training.  This  man  of  the 
Reformation  was  of  a  strong  and  logical  mind,  and, 
having  adopted  Calvin's  notions  and  thoroughly 
made  them  his  own,  put  forth  all  his  powers  to 
maintain  them.  From  1564,  when  Calvin  died,  and 
Beza  succeeded  to  all  his  offices,  there  was  no  lack 
of  strong  and  vigorous  arguments  in  favor  of  Cal- 
vinism. Beza,  if  so  it  could  be,  was  a  stronger 
Calvinist  than  Calvin.     Calvinism  spread  into  the 


102  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

Netherlands,  and  students  went  from  these  northern 
countries  down  to  Geneva  for  their  theological  stud- 
ies with  Beza.  He  did  not  fail  to  indoctrinate  them 
soundly  and  thoroughly.  James  Arminius  and 
Uytenbogaert  received  their  training  under  this  in- 
domitable master,  Beza.  But  they  revolted,  and 
Arminius  stood  as  the  great  champion  of  the  bet- 
ter, clearer,  happier  interpretation  of  God's  purpose 
and  plan  in  human  salvation. 

II.  Tiie  doctrine  as  taught  by  Arminius  was  "the 
result  of  long,  calm,  and  patient  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures," and  its  statement  was  a  clear,  full,  ami  forcible 
answer  to  predestination  as  taught  by  Augustine,  Gott- 
schalk,  Calvin,  and  Beza. 

The  state  of  the  controversy  is  well  put  by  Dr. 
W.  F.  Warren  :  "  The  great  error  which  he  [Ar- 
minius] had  to  combat,  consisted  in  making  the  Di- 
vine efficiency  with  relation  to  one  temporal  phe- 
nomenon— viz.,  the  readjustment  of  the  disturbed 
relation  of  God  and  the  sinner — an  exception,  mak- 
ing the  action  of  the  Divine  efficiency  to  that  phe- 
nomenon essentially  unlike  in  relation  to  any  other 
temporal  phenomenon  in  the  universe.  The  Church 
had  held  that  every  exercise  of  the  Divine  effi- 
ciency in  relation  to  temporal  phenomena,  was  sub- 
jectively conditioned  by  Divine  wisdom,  omnis- 
cience, and  goodness.  Calvinism,  on  the  other  hand, 
maintained  that  this  particular  exercise  of  Divine 
efficiency  was  absolutely  unconditioned,  and  was 
grounded  solely  upon  the  arbitrary  good  pleasure  of 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  103 

God.  The  refutation  of  this  error,  aud  the  re-es- 
tablishment of  the  opposite  view,  was  the  mission  of 
James  Arminius."    (Meth.  Quart.  Rev.,  July,  1857, 

p.  350.) 

Words  of  Arminius. 

It  is  profitable  to  quote  from  the  works  of  Ar- 
minius. When  Arminius  "  was  before  the  States 
of  Holland,  at^The  Hague,  on  the  30th  of  October, 
1608,"  he  gave  to  that  honorable  body  a  clear  state- 
ment of  his  teachings  regarding  predestination,  as 
well  as  other  features  of  Calvinism.  After  he  had 
clearly  stated  the  doctrine  of  predestination  in 
terms  largely  taken  from  Calvinistic  writings,  he 
proceeded  to  analyze  the  subject,  and  set  forth 
their  Calvinism  under  three  forms.  The  first  was 
as  follows  : 

"1.  That  God  has  absolutely  and  precisely  de- 
creed to  save  certain  particular  men  by  his  mercy 
or  grace,  but  to  condemn  others  by  his  justice ;  and 
to  do  all  this  without  having  any  regard  in  such  a 
decree  to  righteousness  or  sin,  obedience  or  disobe- 
dience, which  could  possibly  exist  on  the  part  of  one 
class  of  men  or  of  the  other.  , 

"  2.  That,  for  the  execution  of  the  preceding 
decree,  God  determined  to  create  Adam,  and  all 
men  in  him,  in  an  upright  state  of  original  right- 
eousness, besides  which  he  also  ordained  them  to 
commit  sin,  that  they  might  thus  become  guilty  of 
eternal  condemnation,  and  be  deprived  of  original 
righteousness. 


104  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

"  3.  That  those  persons  whom  God  has  thus 
positively  willed  to  save,  he  has  decreed  not  only 
to  salvation,  but  also  the  means  which  pertain  to 
it  (that  is,  to  conduct  and  bring  them  to  faith  in 
Christ  Jesus,  and  to  perseverance  in  that  faith)  ;  and 
that  he  also  in  reality  leads  them  to  these  results  by 
a  grace  and  power  that  are  irresistible,  so  that  it  is 
not  possible  for  them  to  do  otherwise  than  to  believe, 
persevere  in  faith,  and  be  saved. 

"  4.  That  to  those  whom,  by  his  Absolute  AVill, 
God  has  foreordained  to  perdition,  he  has  also  de- 
creed to  deny  that  grace  which  is  necessary  and 
sufficient  for  salvation,  and  does  not  in  reality  con- 
fer it  upon  them,  so  that  they  are  neither  placed  in 
a  possible  condition,  nor  in  any  capacity  of  believ- 
ing or  of  being  saved." 

He  says  :  "I  reject  this  predestination  for  the 
following  reasons  : 

"(1)  Because  it  is  not  the  foundation  of  Chris- 
tianity, of  salvation,  or  of  certainty. 

"  (2)  This  doctrine  of  predestination  comprises 
within  it  neither  the  whole  nor  any  part  of  the 
gospel. 

"  (3)  The  doctrine  was  never  admitted,  de- 
creed, or  approved  in  any  Council,  either  general  or 
particular,  for  the  fii'st  six  hundred  years  after 
Christ. 

"  (4)  None  of  those  doctors  or  divines  of  the 
Church  who  held  correct  and  orthodox  sentiments 
for  the  first  six  hundred  years  after  the  birth  of 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  105 

Christ,  ever  brought  this  doctrine  forward,  or  gave 
it  their  approval. 

"  (5)  It  neither  agrees  nor  corresponds  with  the 
harmony  of  these  Confessions,  which  were  printed 
and  published  together  in  one  volume  at  Geneva  in 
the  name  of  the  Reformed  Churches. 

"  (6)  It  may  very  properly  be  made  a  question 
of  doubt  whether  this  doctrine  agrees  with  the  Bel- 
gic  Confession,  and  the  Heidelberg  Catechism," 
which  he  proceeds  to  demonstrate. 

"  (7)  This  doctrine  is  repugnant  to  the  nature 
of  God,  particularly  to  those  attributes  of  his  na- 
ture by  which  he  performs  and  manages  all  things, 
his  wisdom,  justice,  and  goodness."  "  Repugnant  to 
his  wisdom,  because  it  represents  God  as  decreeing 
something  for  a  particular  end,  which  neither  is  nor 
can  be  good,  .  .  .  because  it  states  that  the 
object  which  God  proposed  to  himself  by  this  pre- 
destination was  to  demonstrate  his  mercy  and  jus- 
tice," which  it  can  not  demonstrate,  "  except  by  an 
act  that  is  contrary  at  once  to  his  mercy  and  justice, 
of  which  desci-iption  is  that  decree  of  God  in  which 
he  determined  that  man  should  sin,  and  be  miser- 
able. It  is  repugnant  to  the  justice  of  God,  .  .  . 
affirming  that  God  has  absolutely  willed  to  save 
certain  individual  men,  and  has  decreed  their  sal- 
vation, without  having  the  least  regard  to  right- 
eousness or  obedience ;  ...  the  proper  infer- 
ence from  which  is,  that  God  loves  such  men  far 
more    than    his    own    justice,"    and    "  because    it 


106  A  R3nNIANISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

affirms  that  God  wishes  to  subject  his  creature's  to 
misery." 

"  (8)  Such  a  doctrine  of  predestination  is  con- 
trary to  the  nature  of  man  in  regard  to  his  having 
been  created  after  the  Divine  Image  in  the  knowl- 
edge of  God  and  righteousness,  in  regard  to  his 
having  been  created  with  a  disposition  and  aptitude 
for  the  enjoyment  of  life  eternal. 

"  (9)  It  is  diametrically  opposed  to  the  act  of 
creation  ;  for  creation  is  a  communication  of  good 
according  to  the  intrinsic  property  of  its  na- 
ture. .  .  •  Reprobation  is  an  act  of  hatred, 
and  from  hatred  derives  its  origin,  and  creation 
does  not  proceed  from  hatred  ;  .  ,  .  creation 
is  a  perfect  act  of  God,  by  which  he  has  manifested 
his  wisdom,  goodness,  and  omnipotence. 

"  (10)  This  doctrine  is  in  open  hostility  with 
the  nature  of  eternal  life,  and  the  titles  by  which 
it  is  signally  distinguished  in  the  Scriptures ;  for  it 
is  called  the  inheritance  of  the  sons  of  God,  but 
those  alone  of  the  sons  of  God,  according  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  gospel,  who  believe  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ.  .  .  .  God,  therefore,  has  not 
from  his  own  absolute  decree,  without  any  consider- 
ation or  regard  whatever  to  faith  and  obedience, 
appointed  to  any  man,  or  determined  to  appoint 
to  him,  life  eternal. 

"  (11)  This  predestination  is  also  opposed  to  the 
nature  of  eternal  death,  and  to  those  appellations 
by  which  it  is  described  in  the  Scriptures ;  for  it  is 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  107 

called  '  the  wages  of  sin,'  the  punishment  of  ever- 
lasting destruction,  which  shall  be  recompensed  to 
them  that  know  not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the 
gospel  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  .  .  .  and  God 
has  not,  by  any  absolute  decree,  without  perfect  re- 
spect to  sin  and  disobedience,  prepared  eternal 
death  for  any  person. 

"  (12)  This  predestination  is  inconsistent  with 
the  nature  and  properties  of  sin  in  two  ways :  (1) 
Because  sin  is  called  disobedience  and  rebellion, 
neither  of  which  terms  can  possibly  apply  to  any  per- 
son who,  by  a  preceding  Divine  decree  is  placed  under 
an  unavoidable  necessity  of  sinning  ;  (2)  Because 
sin  is  the  meritorious  cause  of  damnation;  but  the 
meritorious  cause  which  moves  the  Divine  Will  to 
reprobate,  is  according  to  justice,  and  it  induces 
God,  who  holds  sin  in  abhorrence,  to  will  reproba- 
tion. Sin,  therefore,  which  is  a,  cause,  can  not  be 
placed  among  the  means  by  which  God  executes  the 
decree  or  will  of  reprobation. 

"  (13)  This  doctrine  is  likewise  rejDUgnant  to 
the  nature  of  Divine  grace,  and,  as  far  as  its  powers 
permit,  it  eifects  its  destruction. 

"  (14)  The  doctrine  of  this  predestination  is 
injurious  to  the  glory  of  God,  for  it  makes  God  the 
author  of  sin. 

"  (15)  This  doctrine  is  highly  dishonorable  to 
Jesus  Christ,  our  Savior  ;  for  it  entirely  excludes 
him  from  that  decree  of  predestination  which  pre- 
destines the   end,  and   argues  that  he    is  not   the 


108  ARMINIANIS3I  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

foundation  of  election.  ...  It  denies  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  a  nieritoi*ious  cause  that  again  ob- 
tained for  us  the  salvation  which  we  had  lost,  by 
placing  him  as  only  a  subordinate  cause  of  that  sal- 
vation, which  had  been  already  foreordained,  and 
thus  only  a  minister  and  instrument  to  apply  that 
salvation  unto  us. 

"  (16)  This  doctrine  is  hateful  to  the  salvation 
of  men,  because  it  prevents  that  saving  and  godly 
sorrow  for  sins  that  have  been  committed,  which 
can  not  exist  in  those  who  have  no  consciousness  of 
sin,  .  .  .  and  it  removes  all  pious  solicitude 
about  being  converted  from  sin  unto  God  ;  .  .  . 
it  restrains,  in  persons  that  are  converted,  all  zeal 
and  studious  regard  for  good  works,  since  it  de- 
clares that  the  degenerate  can  not  perform  either 
more  or  less  good  than  they  do  ;  .  .  .  it  ex- 
tinguishes the  zeal  for  prayer,  which  yet  is  an  effi- 
cacious means  instituted  by  God  for  asking  and  ob- 
taining all  kinds  of  blessings  from  him,  but  takes 
away  all  that  most  salutary  fear  and  trembling  with 
which  we  are  commanded  to  work  out  our  own  sal- 
vation ;  ...  it  produces  within  men  a  despair 
both  of  performing  that  which  their  duty  requires, 
and  of  obtaining  that  towards  which  their  desires 
are  directed. 

"(17)  This  doctrine  inverts  the  order  of  the 
gospel  of  Jesus  Christ. 

"(18)  This  predestination  is  in  open  hostility  to 
the  ministry  of  the  gospel ;  for  if  God    by  an  irre- 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  109 

sistible  power  quickens  him  who  is  dead  iu  trespasses 
aud  siu,  no  man  can  be  a  minister  and  a  laborer  to- 
gether with  God,  nor  can  tlie  word  preached  of  man 
be  the  instrument  of  grace  and  of  the  Spirit.  .  .  . 
By  this  predestination  the  ministry  of  the  gospel  is 
made  the  savor  of  death  unto  death  in  the  case  of 
the  majority  of  those  who  hear  it,  as  well  as  an  in- 
strument of  condemnation.  .  ,  .  According  to 
this  doctrine,  baptism,  when  administered  to  many 
reprobate  children,  is  evidently  a  seal  of  nothing, 
and  thus  becomes  useless.  It  hinders  public  prayers 
from  being  oftered  to  God  in  a  becoming  and  suitable 
manner.  .  .  .  The  constitution  of  this  doctrine 
is  such  as  so  very  easily  to  render  pastors  slothful 
and  negligent  in  the  exercise  of  their  ministry. 

"  (19)  This  doctrine  completely  subverts  the 
foundation  of  religion  in  general,  aud  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion  in  particular. 

"  (20)  This  doctrine  of  predestination  hath  been 
rejected  both  in  former  times  and  in  our  own  day  by 
the  greater  part  of  the  professors  of  Christianity." 

To  the  second  form  of  predestination,  which 
was  also  supralapsarian,  Arminius  said:  "But 
though  the  inventors  of  this  scheme  have  been  de- 
sii'ous  of  using  the  greatest  precaution,  lest  it  might 
be  concluded  from  their  doctrine  that  God  is  the 
author  of  sin,  with  as  much  show  of  probability  as 
is  deducible  from  the  first  scheme,  yet  w^e  shall  dis- 
cover that  the  fall  of  Adam  can  not  possibly,  accord- 
ing to  their  views,  be  considered  in  any  other  man- 


1 1 0  ARMINIA NISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

ner  than  as  a  necessary  means  for  the  execution  of 
the  preceding  decree  of  predestination.  For,  first,  it 
states  that  God  determined  by  the  decree  of  repro- 
bation to  deny  to  man  that  grace  which  was  necessary 
for  the  confirmation  and  strengthening  of  his  na- 
ture, that  it  might  not  be  corrupted  by  sin,  which 
amounts  to  this,  that  God  decreed  not  to  bestow 
that  grace  which  was  necessary  to  avoid  sin,  and 
from  this  must  necessarily  follow  the  transgression 
of  man  as  proceeding  from  a  law  imposed  upon 
him.  The  fall  of  man  is,  therefore,  a  means  or- 
dained for  the  execution  of  the  decree  of  repro- 
bation. 

"It  states  that  the  two  parts  of  reprobation  are' 
preterition  and  predamnation.  These  two  parts  — 
although  the  latter  views  .man  as  a  sinner  and  ob- 
noxious to  justice — are,  according  to  that  decree,  con- 
nected together  by  a  necessary  and  mutual  bond, 
and  are  equally  extensive ;  for  those  whom  God 
passed  by  in  conferring  grace  are  likewise  damned. 
Indeed,  uo  others  are  damned,  except  those  who 
are  the  subjects  of  this  act  of  preterition.  From 
this,  therefore,  it  must  be  concluded  that  sin  neces- 
sarily follows  from  the  decree  of  reprobation  or 
preterition ;  because  if  it  were  otherwise,  it  might 
possibly  happen  that  a  person  who  had  been  passed 
by  might  not  commit  sin,  and  from  that  circum- 
stance might  not  become  liable  to  damnation.  This 
second  opinion  on  predestination,  therefore,  falls 
into  the  same  inconvenience  as  the  first — the  mak- 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  HI 

ing  God  the  author  of  sin."  (Watson's  Theo- 
logical Institutes,  Vol.  II,  pp.  392-393.) 

The  third  phase  of  predestination  is  Sublap- 
sarian,  "  in  which  man,  as  the  object  of  predestina- 
tion, is  considered  fallen."  Of  this  Arminius  tersely 
said  :  "Because  God  willed  within  himself  from  all 
eternity  to  make  a  decree  by  which  he  might  elect 
certain  men  and  reprobate  the  rest,  he  viewed  and 
considered  the  human  race,  not  only  as  created, 
but  likewise  as  fallen  or  corrupt,  and  on  that  ac- 
count obnoxious  to  malediction.  Out  of  this  lapsed 
and  accursed  state,  God  determined  to  liberate  cer- 
tain individuals,  and  freely  to  save  them  by  his 
grace  for  a  declaration  of  his  mercy;  but  he  resolved, 
in  his  own  just  judgment,  to  leave  the  rest  under 
malediction  for  a  declaration  of  his  justice.  In 
both  these  cases  God  acts  without  the  slightest  con- 
sideration of  repentance  and  faith  in  those  whom  he 
elects,  or  of  impenitence  and  unbelief  in  those 
whom  he  reprobates.  This  opinion  places  the  fall 
of  man,  not  as  a  means  foreordained  for  the  execu- 
tion of  the  decree  of  predestination,  as  before  ex- 
plained, but  as  something  that  might  furnish  a 
proseresis,  or  occasion  for  this  decree  of  predestina- 
tion." (Watson's  Theological  Institutes,  Vol.  II, 
pp.  393-394.) 

III.  Arminiankm,  in  its  contact  with  Socinianism, 
was  as  outspoken  in  its  antagonism  to  its  dogma  as  when 
it  sought  to  counteract  predestination. 

Arrainianism  did  not  oscillate  between  the  two, 


112  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

but  maintained  its  attitude  consistently,  and  dealt 
sturdy  blows  upon  each,  until  each  was  made  to 
feel  the  sandiness  of  its  foundation.  Socinianism 
held  that  "  Christ  was  a  man,  miraculously  con- 
ceived and  divinely  endowed,  but  not  to  receive 
divine  worship  ;  that  the  object  of  his  death  was 
to  perfect  and  complete  his  example,  and  to  pre- 
pare the  way  for  his  resurrection,  the  necessary  his- 
torical basis  of  Christianity  ;  that  the  soul  is  pure 
by  nature,  though  contaminated  by  evil  example 
and  teaching  from  a  very  early  age."  One  can  not 
read  the  works  of  Arminius  without  finding  a  vast 
number  of  sentences  opposing  diametrically  these 
Socinian  doctrines.  He  taught  the  person  of  Jesus 
Christ  as  a  perfect  incarnation,  a  God-man.  This 
Divine  Being  is  the  object  of  the  most  perfect  wor- 
ship. Jesus  Christ  died,  not  as  an  example,  but  as 
a  vicarious  sacrifice  for  sin.  The  Arminianism  of 
Arminius  and  Episcopius  taught,  in  the  best  and 
highest  sense,  that  without  the  shedding  of  blood 
there  is  no  remission  of  sins.  Here  also  was  taught 
that  man  was  not  born  in  the  world  pure  by  na- 
ture, but  by  nature  was  corrupt.  The  child  inherits 
a  sinful  nature.  This  sinful  nature  can  only  be 
changed  and  purified  by  the  personal  application  of 
the  blood  of  the  atonement. 

There  were  some  persons  at  a  later  date  who 
made  a  cloak  of  Arminianism  to  teach  heretical 
doctrine;  but  they  were  not  Arminians,  and  did  not 
teach  Arminianism,  and  should  not  be  held  account- 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  113 

able  to  Arminianism.  A  full  and  complete  atone- 
ment, perfect  freedom  of  the  will,  and  salvation  by 
faith  to  all  repenting  sinners,  was  the  kernel  of  Ar- 
minian  teaching. 

IV.  Arviiniankvi,  in  its  contact  with  Pelagianism, 
ivasfirm  and  true  to  the  doctrines  of  tJie  primitive  Church. 

These  doctrines  respecting  the  nature  of  sin,  and 
the  absolute  corrupted  human  nature,  and  the  de- 
pendence upon  divine  grace  for  salvation,  were 
taught  in  their  strongest  character. 

Pelagianism  held  that  "  there  was  no  original 
sin  through  Adam,  and  consequently  no  hereditary 
guilt;  that  every  soul  is  created  of  God  sinless;  that 
the  will  is  absolutely  free,  and  that  the  grace  of 
God  is  universal,  but  is  not  indispensable."  While 
Pelagius  held  to  a  Divine  Trinity,  he  had  no  office 
for  the  Second  Person  as  a  Savior  of  man. 

In  every  respect  was  Arminianism  the  antago- 
nist of  Pelagianism.  Arminianism  taught  that  in 
the  sin  of  Adam  there  was  such  a  corruption  of  his 
nature  that  he  communicated  the  taint  to  all  of 
his  posterity,  and  not  one  is  born,  or  ever  will  be 
born,  free  from  the  corruption  of  sin.  Arminianism 
makes  clear  the  distinction  between  the  corruption 
of  our  nature  and  the  guilt  of  Adam.  It  holds 
that  the  grace  of  God  is  indispensably  necessary  to 
salvation,  and  without  it,  there  is  no  coming  to  the 
Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world  for 
personal  salvation. 

Arminianism  says  that  there  is  a  Divine  Trinity, 


114  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

and  that  the  office  of  the  Second  Person  of  the 
Trinity  is  to  make  atonement  for  sin  and  reconcile 
God  to  man,  thereby  making  it  possible  for  all  men, 
individually,  to  come  to  salvation  and  live  forever. 
Armiuianism  is  as  distinct  from  Pelagianism  as  day 
is  from  night,  even  though  the  traducers  of  the 
system  have  undertaken  to  establish  the  opposite. 

V.  Arminianmn  has  been  of  immense  value  to  the 
theological  world,  holding  in  check  its  extravagances,  and 
moderating  and  liberalizing  the  harsh  atul  illiberal 
spirit  of  Calvinism,  and  giving  to  mankind  a  more 
clieerftd  vieiv  of  God's  relations  to  man. 

In  speaking  of  the  services  of  James  Armin- 
ius  in  developing  and  advocating  Arminianism, 
that  great  Arminian  writer,  Watson,  in  his  Insti 
tutes,  says:  "They  preserved  many  of  the  Lu- 
theran Churches  from  the  tide  of  Supralapsarian- 
ism,  and  its  constant  concomitant,  Antinoraian- 
ism.  They  moderated  even  Calvinism  in  many 
places,  and  gave  better  countenance  and  cour- 
age to  the  Sublapsarian  scheme,  which,  though 
logically  perhaps  not  so  much  to  be  preferred 
to  that  of  Calvin,  is  at  least  not  so  revolting, 
and  does  not  impose  the  same  necessities  upon 
men  of  cultivating  that  hardihood  which  glories 
in  extremes  and  laughs  at  moderation.  They 
gave  rise,  incidentally,  to  a  still  milder  modification 
of  the  doctrine  of  decrees,  known  in  England  by 
the  name  of  Baxterianism,  in  which  homage  is,  at 
least  in  words,  paid   to  the  justice,  truth,  and  be- 


DOCTRINAL   CONTROVERSIES.  115 

nevolence  of  God.  They  have  also  left  on  record 
in  the  beautiful,  learned,  eloquent,  and,  above  all 
these,  the  Scriptural  system  of  theology  furnished 
by  the  writings  of  Arminius,  how  truly  man  may 
be  proven  totally  and  hereditarily  corrupt,  without 
converting  him  into  a  machine  or  a  devil  ;  how 
fully  secured  in  the  scheme  of  the  redemption  of 
man  by  Jesus  Christ,  without  making  the  Almighty 
partial,  willful,  and  unjust ;  how  much  the  Spirit's 
operation  in  man  is  enhanced  and  glorified  by  the 
doctrine  of  the  freedom  of  the  human  will,  in  con- 
nection with  that  of  its  assistance  by  Divine  grace  ; 
with  how  much  luster  the  doctrine  of  justification 
by  Christ  shines,  when  offered  to  the  assisted  choice 
of  all  mankind  instead  of  being  confined  to  the 
forced  acceptance  of  a  few ;  how  the  doctrine  of 
election,  when  it  is  made  conditional  on  faith  un- 
foreseen, harmonizes  with  the  wisdom,  holiness,  and 
goodness  of  God,  among  a  race  of  beings  to  all  of 
whom  faith  was  made  possible ;  and  how  reproba- 
tion harmonizes  with  justice  when  it  has  a  reason, 
not  in  arbitrary  will,  the  sovereignty  of  a  pasha, 
but  in  the  principles  of  a  righteous  government." 
(McClintock  and  Strong,  Vol.  I,  p.  415.) 

Dr.  Copleston's  Words. 

Since  writing  the  above,  I  find  a  very  fine 
rhame  in  one  of  the  Bampton  Lectures  of  the  ex- 
cellent influence  of  Arminianism  on  Lutheranism. 
"It  is   pleasing   and  satisfactory,"  says  Dr.    Cople- 


116  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIST  OR  Y. 

ston,  "  to  trace  the  progress  of  Melanchthon's  opin- 
ion upon  the  subject  [of  universal  redemption  of 
mankind  through  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  by  the 
exercise  of  repentance  and  faith  of  whosoever  will]. 
In  the  first  dawning  of  the  Reformation,  he,  as  well 
as  Luther,  had  been  led  into  some  metaphysical  dis- 
cussions, which  Calvin  afterwards  molded  into  a 
system,  and  incorporated  with  his  exposition  of  tha 
Christian  doctrine.  But  so  early  as  the  year  1529 
he  renounced  this  error,  and  expunged  the  passages 
that  contained  it  from  the  later  editions  of  his 
Loci  Theologlci.  Luther,  who  had  in  his  early  life 
maintained  the  same  opinions,  after  the  controversy 
with  Erasmus  about  free  will,  never  taught  them. 
And  although  he  did  not,  with  the  candor  of  Me- 
lanchthon,  openly  retract  what  he  had  once  wi'itten, 
yet  he  bestowed  the  highest  commendations  on  the 
last  editions  of  Melanchthon's  work  containing  this 
correction.  He  also  scrupled  not  to  assert  publicly 
that  at  the  beginning  of  the  Reformation  his  creed 
was  not  completely  settled  ;  and  in  his  last  work  of 
any  importance  he  is  anxious  to  point  out  the  qual- 
ifications with  which  all  he  had  said  on  the  doctrine 
of  absolute  necessity  ought  to  be  received." 

Having  thus  traced  the  relation  of  Armiuianism 
to  Calvinism,  Socinianism,  and  Pelagianism,  and 
having  seen  the  influence  that  similar  doctrines 
which  Avere  abroad  in  the  world  previous  to  the  day 
of  Arminius,  had  upon  the  minds  of  Luther  and 
Mclanchthon,  we  are  prepared    to  say  that,  in   our 


DOCTRINAL  CONTROVERSIES.  117 

humble  judgment,  Arminianism  stands  forth  as  the 
uncorrupted  teaching  of  the  primitive  Church,  the 
doctrine  taught  by  the  apostles,  and  the  doctrine 
which  they  received  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
In  no  sense  is  Arminianism  to  be  made  responsible 
for  the  vagaries  and  heretical  teachings  of  the 
Socinians,  Pelagians,  or  any  other  sect  or  people, 
and  to  attempt  to  make  them  so  responsible,  is  il- 
logical, unwise,  and  sinful. 


Chapter  VI. 

PRE-WESLEYAN  ARMINIANIvSM  IN  EUROPE. 

Three  Periods  to  be  studied:  1st.  Class  of  Arminian  Writers, 
Limborch  and  his  Theologia  Christiana;  2d.  Class  of 
Arminian  Writers:  Voetius,  at  Leyden;  Vorstius,  Co- 
logne; Hnme's  Statement  regarding  Vorstiiis;  3d.  Class 
of  Writers — Phases  of  the  Controversy— Not  Protestant- 
ism alone  rent  with  Discussion— Romanist  Jansenists 
were  Predestinationists—Jesuits  were  against  Predestina- 
tion—Amyraut— Objective  and  Siibjective  Grace — Uni- 
tas  Fratrum — Modern  Moravians:  Zinzendorf,  Peter 
Bohler — Mennonnites — Arminian  Conflict  in  England — 
Peter  Baro— Sermon  against  the  Lambeth  Articles — John 
Playfere,  a  Professor  at  Cambridge— His  Lectures  on  Ar- 
minianism — Dr.  Samuel  Hoard — Dr.  John  Goodwin — 
Bishops  Laud  and  Juxon — Fletcher's  Estimate  of  Laud 
and  his  Arminianism— Hallam's  Account  of  the  Theo- 
logical Controversy — The  Age  of  Theological  Revolt  in 
England— Jewell,  Nowell,  Sanders,  and  Cox— Zurich 
Letters — Bullinger  and  his  Influence — James  I  attempts 
to  control  the  Synod  of  Dort — Ei)iscopal  Arminian  Di- 
vines: Cudworth,  Pierce,  Jeremy  Taylor,  Tillotson, 
Stillingfleet,  etc. — Quotation  as  to  the  Theological 
Teaching  in  the  Eighteenth  Century. 

Mr.  Wesley  became,  in  his  early  career,  one 
of  the  most  earnest  and  strongest  advocates  of 
James  Armiuius's  modes  of  interpreting  the  predes- 
tinationism  of  his  age.  When  this  bias  was  given 
to  his  mind,  and  by  what  influences,  history  is 
silent ;  but  we  think,  by  tracing  up  the  history  of 
Arminianism,  we  shall  find  influences  that  uecessa- 
118 


PRE-  WESLE  YAN  A  RMINIA  NISM.  119 

rily  wrought  upon  his  mind,  producing  this  effect. 
It  is  probable  that  his  father  had  something  to  do 
with  this  early  impression,  for  he  was  in  revolt  from 
the  Calvinism  of  the  Established  Church  soon  after 
John's  birth  ;  and  his  mother,  though  remaining 
somewhat  in  bondage,  added  to  the  impression  of 
the  goodness  of  God  in  providing  a  possible  way 
for  the  salvation  of  a  sinful  soul.  As  Mr.  Wesley 
studied  all  the  phases  of  the  Divine  government 
with  reference  to  men  as  a  whole  and  as  individ- 
uals, and  grasped  the  greatness  of  the  past,  and 
then  saw  the  magnitude  of  the  power  of  God  and 
his  wonderful  and  inexhaustible  resources,  he  most 
firmly  took  hold  of  the  doctrine  that  "  He  is  able 
to  save  to  the  uttermost  all  that  come  unto  God  by 
him,  seeing  that  he  ever  liveth  to  make  intercession 
for  us." 

When  the  relation  of  Mr.  Wesley  to  the  revival 
of  the  Arminian  doctrine  is  studied,  there  are  three 
periods  to  be  first  considered,  viz.  : 

I.  The  second  class  of  Arminian  writers  and 
scholars. 

II.  Some  persons  who  taught  a  corrupted,  ex- 
travagant, and  perverted  Arminianism, 

III.  Pre-Wesleyan  Arminianism  on  the  Conti- 
nent and  in  England. 

I.  The  second  class  of  Arminian  writers  and 
scholars  were  generally  strong,  clear-minded,  and 
accurate  defenders  of  the  doctrine.  They  were  men 
of  great  learning,    skilled   in   debate,  and   equally 


120  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIS  TOR  Y. 

skillful  iu  their  writings.  AVhilst  many  of  them 
were  greatly  persecuted,  and  driven  from  their  pul- 
pits or  professors'  chairs,  and  compelled  to  endure 
hardships  bodily,  they  still  wielded  an  influence  that 
was  felt  for  good  throughout  the  western  portion  of 
the  Continent  of  Europe. 

Most  of  them  were  men  capable  of  shining  iu 
any  age  of  the  world,  and  reflecting  honor  upon 
whatever  institution  or  cause  to  which  they  at- 
tached their  names.  They  left,  in  many  cases,  lu- 
crative positions,  court  favor,  and  certain  advance- 
ment, for  the  sake  of  truth  and  principle.  They 
clearly  recognized  the  sandy  foundation  of  foreor- 
dination,  and  the  errors  of  the  conclusions  of  Supra- 
lapsarian  predestination,  and  the  spiritual  poverty 
involved  in  a  necessitated  will,  and  at  once  aban- 
doned them  for  a  better,  more  liberal,  more  scien- 
tific, and  more  spiritual  system,  as  found  in  Armin- 
ianism.  Their  history  is  worth  tracing.  Of  the 
second  class  of  Arminian  writers,  only  one  need  be 
mentioned,  who  is  an  excellent  representative  of 
all.     He  was  a  truly  great  man. 

Philip  Van  Limborch. 

Philip  Van  Limborch  was  born  in  Amsterdam, 
June  19,  1633.  He  was  a  nephew,  on  his  mother's 
side,  of  the  great  Episcopius,  and  inherited  much 
of  the  same  mental  power  which  was  possessed  by 
this  great  man  of  the  Chuix'h.  His  childhood  was 
not   particularly  distinguished  ;    but  when  he  com- 


PEE-  WESLE  YAN  A  RMINIA  NISM.  121 

menced  his  studies  in  earnest,  he  became  well  versed 
in  ethics,  history,  and  philosophy.  After  his  early 
studies  at  Amsterdam,  he  entered  the  university  at 
Utrecht,  where  he  heard  Voetius  lecture  on  the  Re- 
formed Theology.  The  bias  had  been  given  to  his 
theology  while  he  listened  to  the  Remonstrants  at 
Amsterdam.  From  1657,  for  ten  years,  Limborch 
was  pastor  of  the  Remonstrant  Church  at  Gonda. 
From  here  he  was  called  to  Amsterdam  as  a  pastor. 
His  success  was  marked  in  the  pastorate  as  a  theo- 
logian, a  brilliant  orator,  and  a  great-hearted  man 
of  God,  who  came  in  close  contact  with  the  common 
people.  In  1668,  he  became  professor  of  Divinity 
in  the  Remonstrant  College  of  Amsterdam.  Here 
his  work  was  well  received,  and  his  influence  in  the 
Church  and  theological  world  felt  to  its  fullest  ex- 
tent. His  great  intellectual  powers  had  a  splendid 
scope  for  their  full  exercise.  He  remained  in  dis- 
charge of  his  duties  in  this  important  official  re- 
lation until  April  30,  1712,  when  death  closed  his 
mortal  career.  Limborch  was  a  man  of  great  in- 
tellectual force,  and  so  threw  himself  into  his  teach- 
ings and  writings  with  enthusiasm  as  to  have  a 
wide  circle  of  influence,  and  to  leave  an  enduring 
impression  upon  theology  for  the  coming  genera- 
tions. Staudlein,  a  celebrated  Holland  writer,  says 
of  this  man  :  ' '  The  most  complete  exposition  of 
the  Arminian  doctrine  is  the  celebrated  work  by 
Philip  Van  Limborch,  a  man  distinguished  for 
genius,  learning,  and  modesty,  whose  literary  labors 


122  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

are  of  great  value.  The  very  arrangement  of  his 
system  displays  originality.  Admirable  pers])icuity 
and  judicious  selection  of  the  material  characterized 
the  entire  woi'k." 

"  Limborch,"  says  another  writer,  "was  gentle 
in  his  disposition,  tolerant  of  the  views  of  others, 
learned,  methodical,  of  a  retentive  memory,  and 
above  all,  had  a  love  for  truth,  and  engaged  in  the 
search  of  it  by  reading  the  Scriptures  with  the  best 
commentators."  As  a  Remonstrant  theologian  he 
stood  next  to  Arminius  and  Episcopius.  His  writ- 
ings were  clear,  forcible,  elegantly  expressed,  and 
introduced  no  novelties  into  the  system  as  advo- 
cated by  the  learned  Arminius.  Among  many 
works  published  by  him,  he  performed  his  greatest 
feat  by  publishing  "A  Complete  System  or  Body  of 
Divinity,  Both  Speculative  and  Practical,  Founded 
on  Scripture  and  Reason."  Of  this  work  it  is  said  : 
"  This  was  the  first  and  most  complete  exposition 
of  the  Arminian  doctrine,  displaying  great  original- 
ity of  arrangement,  and  admirable  perspicuity,  and 
judicious  selection  of  material.  The  preparation  of 
this  work  was  undertaken  at  the  request  of  the  Re- 
monstrants." 

Of  Limborch's  power  as  a  commentator  Dr. 
Kitto  has  spoken  when  reviewing  his  excgetical 
"  Commentarius  in  Acta.  Apos.  et  in  Epistolas  ad 
Romanos  et  ad  Hebrieos."  "  This  commentary,"  says 
Kitto,  "  though  written  in  the  interest  of  the  au- 
thor's  theological   views,   is  deserving  of  attention 


PRE-  WESLE YAN  A  RMINIA  NISM.  123 

for  the  good  sense,  clear  thought,  and  acute  reason- 
ing by  which  it  is  pervaded." 

Limborch,  among  other  works,  published  his 
"  Theologia  Christiana"  in  1683,  at  the  request  of 
the  Remonstrants.  This  book  was  a  clear  setting 
forth  of  a  complete  system  of  religion,  and  a 
"  Book  of  Divinity,"  both  speculative  and  practical, 
"  founded  on  Scripture  and  reason."  It  was  an  ex- 
position of  the  Arminian  doctrines,  and  was  not  at 
variance  with  what  had  been  taught,  first  by  Ar- 
minius,  and  afterwards  by  Simon  Episcopius.  Of 
this  work  of  Limborch's,  it  is  said  that  it  was  "the 
first  and  most  complete  exposition  of  the  Arminian 
doctrine,  displaying  great  originality  of  arrange- 
ment, and  admirable  perspicuity,  and  judicious  se- 
lection of  material."  The  distinctions  which  Lim- 
borch made  between  Arminianism  and  Calvinism 
were  very  clear  and  exceedingly  convincing.  The 
temper  with  which  he  entered  upon  and  prosecuted 
this  work  was  all  that  could  have  been  asked  of  any 
theologian  by  the  most  captious  and  fault-finding 
person.  He  had  no  hard  names  or  unkind  epi- 
thets for  opponents,  and  did  not  desire  to  indicate 
that  it  was  impossible  for  those  who  held  a  doctrine 
contrary  to  his  own  to  be  brought  into  fellowship 
with  the  Divine  Jesus,  and  be  eternally  saved. 
There  was  the  same  liberality  which  had  been  ex- 
hibited on  the  part  of  all  the  great  champions  of 
Arminianism  who  had  preceded  him. 

II.   There  were  some  persons  who  taught  a  cor- 


124  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIS  TOR  Y. 

rupted,  extravagant,  aud  perverted  Arminianism, 
•for  which  true  Arminiauism  should  not  be  held  ac- 
countable. 

Gysburtius  Voetius. 

Gysburtius  Voetius,  D.  D.,  was  one  of  the  earlier 
of  the  men  who  taught  Arminianism  in  a  distorted 
aud  unnatural  manner.  He  was  born  in  1588,  at 
Heusden,  in  Holland.  When  a  student  at  Leyden, 
he  listened  to  the  teachings  of  both  Gomarus  aud 
Arminius.  He  leaned  to  the  Calvinism  of  Gomarus, 
but  became  well  acquainted  with  the  language  of 
Arminius  and  his  doctrines.  In  the  process  of  time 
Voetius  became  an  adept  in  controversy,  having  a 
taste  for  that  kind  of  work.  His  language  against 
Arminianism  was  sometimes  immoderate  aud  un- 
kind. He  had  neither  love  nor  respect  for  "  Zwing- 
lianism,  nor  Melanchthonism,  and  no  admiration 
for  Grotius."  He  called  Erasmus  "an  Arian,  Pe- 
lagian, Socinian,  and  skeptic."  "  His  great  am- 
bition was  the  achievement  of  the  overthrow  of 
Arminianism,  aud  this  influenced  his  scholarly  char- 
acter as  well  as  his  general  conduct.  His  exegesis 
lacked  independence,  and  aimed  less  at  the  dis- 
covery of  what  constituted  religious  truth  than  at 
the  invention  of  philological  and  other  arguments 
to  defend  the  system  he  preferred."  The  state- 
ments of  Voetius,  Avhich  were  harsh  aud  "  in  a  bar- 
barous, artificial  terminology,"  and  did  not  always 
have  a   regard  for  a  "  true    statement  of  the  doc- 


PRE-  WKSLE  YA  N  A  R  MINI  A  NISM.  125 

trines  of  Armiuius,"  had  very  much  to  do  with 
making  a  "corrupted,  extravagant,  and  pei'verted 
Arminianism." 

Conrad  Vorstius. 

Conrad  Vorstius,  born  in  1569,  at  Cologne,  edu- 
cated at  Dusseldorf  and  Cologne,  became  a  doctor 
at  Heidelberg,  and  was  professor  of  Theology  at 
Steiufurt,  a  situation  accepted  in  place  of  the 
same  which  was  offered  him  at  Geneva.  On  the 
death  of  Arminius  he  was  called  to  Leyden.  Be- 
fore this  he  had  published  "  Disputationes  de  Na- 
tura  et  Attributis  Dei,"  in  which  he  championed 
Arminianism.  The  fame  of  this  preceded  him  to 
Leyden,  and,  on  arriving,  he  found  his  hands  and 
head  full  of  labor,  maintaining  his  doctrine,  espe- 
cially that  regarding  "  Christ  and  predestination." 
He  seems  to  have  very  ably  defended  his  positions, 
and  took  his  place  as  a  professor,  and  continued  to 
advocate  these  doctrines  for  a  number  of  years. 
His  book  reached  England,  and  King  James  I  be- 
came involved,  in  some  way,  in  the  controversy, 
"A  professor  of  Divinity,  named  Vorstius,"  says 
Hume,  "  the  disciple  of  Arminius,  was  called  from 
a  German  to  a  Dutch  university,  and  as  he  differed 
from  his  Britannic  Majesty  in  some  nice  questions 
concerning  the  intimate  essence  and  secret  decrees 
of  God,  he  was  considered  a  dangerous  rival  in 
scholastic  fame,  and  was  at  last  obliged  to  yield  to 
the  legions  of  that  royal  doctor,  whose  syllogisms 
9 


126  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

he  might  have  refuted  or  eluded.  If  vigor  .was 
wanting  in  other  incidents  of  James's  reign,  here  he 
behaved  even  with  haughtiness  and  insolence ;  and 
the  States  were  obliged,  after  several  remonstrances, 
to  deprive  Vorstius  of  his  chair,  and  to  banish  him 
from  their  dominions."  (Hume's  History  of  Eng- 
land, Vol.  IV,  p.  421.) 

III.  Pre-Wesleyan  Armiuianism  on  the  Conti- 
nent and  in  England,  when  traced  out,  is  found  to 
present  three  phases :  1.  A  leaning  away  from  Cal- 
vinism, seemingly  toward  Pelagiauism  and  Univer- 
salism.  2.  An  attempt  to  shun  this  appearance  by 
leaning  toward  Calvinism,  and  yet  not  to  Calvin- 
ism. 3.  Maintaining  the  true  position  between 
Calvinism  and  Pelagianism,  not  in  a  moderate  Au- 
gustiuism,  but  in  the  doctrines  of  Arminius,  to  wit : 
"That  God  created  rnan  upright  and  pure,  and 
placed  him  in  a  probation  state,  with  power  to  en- 
dure all  temptation,  and  ability  to  fall,  and,  when 
man  sinned,  made  a  way  possible  for  all  men  to  re- 
turn to  him  and  purity,  on  condition  of  repent- 
ance and  faith,  to  be  exercised  in  the  utmost  free- 
dom of  the  will,  or  by  the  same  will  to  be  rejected." 

Protestantism  was  not  alone  torn  by  internal 
dissensions  and  contentions  regarding  "grace  and 
free  will."  In  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  the 
great  monastic  orders,  "Dominicans  and  Benedic- 
tines, contended  for  their  several  opinions,  while  in 
France  Jesuits  and  Jansenists  took  the  field  of  con- 
trovesy,     .     .     .      the    Jansenists,   being  the  Re- 


PRE-WESLEYAN  ARMINIANISM.  127 

formed  or  Calvinistic  party,  while  the  Jesuits  were 
the  Free-will  advocates."  But  all  these  parties  so 
soon  ran  off  on  a  tangent  from  religion  into  poli- 
tics, that  they  lost  sight  entirely  of  the  subject  of 
freedom  of  the  will  and  jjredestination. 

Moses  Amyraut. 

There  was  a  man  by  the  name  of  Amyraut, 
sometimes  called  Amyrauldus,  born  in  Anjou  in 
1596,  who  embraced  Protestantism,  and  became 
professor  of  Theology  at  Bourgueil.  He  started  out 
as  a  strong  Calvinist,  but  after  a  time  it  began  to 
be  whispered  that  his  teachings  regarding  predes- 
tination and  grace  were  not  orthodox  according  to 
the  dictum  of  Geneva.  In  1634  he  published  his 
views,  which  were  called  Universalist  and  Armin- 
ian.  On  a  careful  examination  of  them,  it  is  found 
that  they  are  neither.  They  were  more  Calvinistic 
than  anything  else.  It  is  claimed  by  those  who 
have  thoroughly  investigated  the  subject,  that  he 
had  one  eye  on  the  Lutheran  doctrine,  and  the 
other  on  Calvinism,  and  he  hoped  to  be  the  medi- 
ator to  reconcile  the  two  branches  of  Christiau 
theology.  Amyraut  asserted  a  "gratia  universalis," 
but  he  meant  not  what  Arminius  taught  by  the  use 
of  such  a  term.  "  He  meant  by  it  sim})ly  that  God 
desires  the  happiness  of  all  men,  provided  they  will 
receive  his  mercy  in  faith  ;  that  none  can  receive 
salvation  without  faith  in  Christ,  that  God  refuses 
to  none   the  power  of  believing,  but   that    he  does 


128  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

not  grant  to  all  his  assistance,  that  they  improve 
their  power  to  saving  purposes  ;  that  none  can  so 
improve  it  without  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  God  is 
not  bound  to  grant  to  any,  and,  in  fact,  does  grant 
only  to  those  who  are  elect  accoixling  to  his  eter- 
nal decree." 

As  if  to  show  how  far  Arayraut  was  from  true 
Arminianism,  it  may  be  said  that  "  he  distinguished 
between  objective  and  subjective  grace."  Object- 
ive grace  offers  salvation  to  all  men  on  condition 
of  repentance  and  faith,  and  is  universal ;  subject- 
ive grace  operates  morally  in  the  conversion  of 
the  soul,  and  in  particular — that  is,  only  given  to 
the  elect.  Such  teaching  is  not  Arminianism, 
even  though  branded  as  such  by  its  enemies. 

The  Lutherans  Tended  to  Arminianism. 

We  have  already  seen  that  the  Lutherans,  under 
the  teaching  of  the  polished  Melauchthon,  strongly 
sympathized  with  the  Arminians,  and  not  with  the 
Calvinists.  The  peculiar  notion  of  Luther  regard- 
ug  the  Lord's  Supper  ])eiug  "  consubstautiation," 
tended  to  prevent  the  adoption  of  the  Calviuistic 
doctrines  in  Germany,  especially  that  of  predesti- 
nation. The  Sacramental  Controversy  was  not  for- 
gotten. It  acted  like  a  barrier  against  the  inroads 
of  the  Reformed  doctrine  of  Geneva.  It  was  sup- 
posed that  the  rude  action  of  the  Synod  of  Dort 
had  completely  crashed  the  Arminian  movement; 
but  Ebrard  savs :  "  This  outward  show  of  victorv 


PRE-WESLEYAN  ARMINIANISM.  129 

was  really  a  defeat ;  for  the  true  elements  of  Ar- 
miaianism  were  not  killed  at  Dort,  but  grew  up 
silently  but  surely  within  the  bosom  of  the  ortho- 
dox Reformed  Church." 

Unitas  Fratrum. 

When  we  turn  to  the  Churches  of  the  Conti- 
nent that  were  Armiuian  before  the  Wesleyan 
movement,  we  find  the  "Unitas  Fratrum,"  United 
Brethren,  or  Moravians,  standing  out  prominently, 
and  clearly  advocating  freedom  of  the  will  and  sal- 
vation provided  for  all  men,  in  opposition  to  the 
predestination  doctrine. 

ZiNZENDORF  AND  THE  MORAVIANS. 

The  modern  Moravians,  sometimes  called  Herrn- 
hutters  and  Zinzendorfiaus,  had  their  revival  in 
Count  Zinzendorf,  about  1722.  Zinzendorf  came 
in  contact  with  some  Christians  of  Moravia,  who 
were  compelled  to  flee  from  their  native  land  in 
consequence  of  the  religious  persecutions  which  they 
suffered.  Zinzendorf  was  a  man  of  wealth,  and 
owned  a  large  territory  in  Germany.  He  invited 
these  persecuted  Christians  to  come  there,  settle, 
and  engage  in  lawful  business.  Being  moved  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  he  determined  "  faithfully  to  take 
charge  of  poor  souls  for  whom  Christ  had  shed  his 
blood,  and  especially  to  collect  together  and  protect 
those  who  were  oppressed  and  persecuted."  Under 
his   godly   direction,    the    company   prospered   and 


130  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

increased  in  wealth,  at  the  same  time  that  they  were 
growing  in  a  rich  religious  experience.  The  sect 
became  early  impressed  with  the  command  of  God 
to  go  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  gospel  to 
every  creature.  Consequently  they  set  out  for 
other  lands  to  disciple  them.  They  believed  that 
Christ  Jesus  died  for  all  mankind,  and  made  it  pos- 
sible for  all  to  come  to  him  for  salvation.  This 
belief  led  them  to  travel  to  Poland,  to  England,  to 
the  wilds  of  North  America,  then  to  Africa  and  to 
the  islands  of  the  sea,  to  preach  the  gospel.  In 
America,  and  afterwards  in  Eui'ope,  they  came  in 
contact  with  the  Wesleys,  and  left  a  sensible  impres- 
sion upon  them.  The  class  of  theologians  raised 
up  among  the  Moravians — such  as  Peter  Bohler 
and  Nitschmann — were  strong  preachers  of  a  pure 
Arminianism.  They  taught,  preached,  and  wrote 
this  system  in  perfect  accord  with  the  purest  state- 
ment of  the  doctrine. 

Mennonites. 

The  Mennonites  also  antedated  Arminius  in  the 
advocacy  of  his  doctrine.  While  originally  they 
were  called  Anabaptists,  and  their  character  was 
doubtless  marred  and  influenced  by  some  practices 
not  to  be  tolerated  in  these  later  days,  yet,  when 
Menno  Simons  effected  his  great  Reformation,  there 
came  out  a  sect  or  people  clear  from  all  the  old 
and  vile  practices,  and  with  an  evangelism  worthy 
of  imitation   by   the   best.     The   Mennonites   held 


PRE-  WESLEYAN  ARMINIA NISM.  131 

that  "the  sacrifice  of  Christ's  death  is  set  forth  as 
applicable  to  all  mankind ;  the  Mennonite  doctrine 
thus  symbolizing  with  Arminianism,  and  not  Cal- 
vinism." (Diet,  of  Sects,  Heresies,  etc.,  by  Blunt, 
p.  311.) 

While  there  have  been  two  distinct  changes  in 
the  Confession  of  Faith  of  the  Mennonites  up  to 
the  present  time,  there  has  been  no  change  in  the 
phase  of  the  doctrines  regarding  original  sin,  pre- 
destination, freedom  of  the  will,  and  the  possible 
personal  salvation  of  each  individual  human  being. 

Arminianism  in  England. 

The  Arminianism  conflict  began  in  England 
early  in  the  seventeenth  century.  Much  controversy 
has  been  had  as  to  whether  the  Articles  of  Religion, 
as  drawn  up  for  the  Church  of  England,  were  in  their 
design  Calvinistic  or  Arminian.  They  have  been 
held  by  some  as  strongly  Calvinistic,  while  a  few 
have  said  that  they  were  designed  to  be  Arminian. 
Whatever  may  have  been  the  design,  the  reader  of 
the  Articles  can  not  come  to  any  other  conclusion 
than  that  they  are  Calvinistic,  and  are  the  language 
of  Geneva,  and  breathe  the  spirit  of  predestination 
in  its  strongest  form.  Cranmer  is  sometimes  spoken 
of  as  an  Arminian ;  but  since  he  had  much  to  do 
with  the  influences  shaping  the  Articles  of  Religion 
of  the  Church  of  England,  somewhere  his  Armin- 
ianism became  greatly  perverted  into  Calvinism. 


132  arminianism  in  history. 

Peter  Baro. 

Peter  Baro,  a  Freuchman  of  culture,  was  made 
"Lady  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity"  in  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge.  He  opposed  predestination  as 
taught  by  the  Calviuists,  and  continued  to  advocate 
"free  will  and  salvation  possible  to  all  men,"  until 
in  1595  the  Calvinists  drew  up  the  "Lambeth 
Articles,"  "which  were  confirmed  by  Archbishop 
Whitgift  and  others."  Baro  delivered  a  sermon 
opposing  these  Articles  with  great  logic  and  clear- 
ness. The  matter  coming  to  the  attention  of  the 
authorities,  he  was  ordered  by  the  vice-chancellor 
to  "abstain  from  all  controversy  on  Articles  of 
Faith."  This  man  held  to  Arminian  doctrines 
before  they  were  so  distinctly  advocated,  of  the 
same  character  as  held  by  James  Arminius  and 
Simon  Episcopius. 

John  Playfere. 

John  Playfere,  a  successor  of  Baro  as  Marga- 
ret Professor  at  Cambridge,  in  1608  became  an 
Arminian  in  doctrine,  of  pronounced  views.  "He 
lectured  on  the  subject  to  his  classes,  and  the  spirit 
of  Arminianism  spread  quite  widely."  He  pub- 
lished a  work  on  the  subject,  having  the  title  "An 
Appeal  to  the  Gospel  for  the  True  Doctrine  of 
Predestination."  Thomas  Baker,  the  antiquary, 
says  that  if  "Playfere's  sermons  had  never  been 
printed,  his  name  would  yet  have  been  honored  in 


PRE-WESLEYAN  ARMINIANISM.  133 

history,  so   decidedly  marked   was   his  influence  on 
the  times." 

Samuel  Hoard. 

Another  eminent  collegian  was  Di*.  Samuel 
Hoard,  the  rector  of  Moretou  College,  who  became 
a  strong  Arminian,  though  originally  a  rank  Cal- 
vinist.  He  published  a  work  entitled,  "God's 
Love  to  Mankind  Manifested  by  Disproving  His 
Absolute  Decree  for  Their  Damnation."  Rev.  John 
Goodwin  was  another  strong  advocate  of  Arminian- 
ism,  for  which  he  was  ejected  from  his  place  and 
position  in  1645. 

Laud  and  Juxon. 

Two  bishops,  Laud  and  Juxon,  became  Ar- 
minians,  though  they  were  the  advocates  of  some 
peculiarities  not  in  the  Arminian  doctrine,  and 
perhaps  did  as  much  harm  to  the  doctrine  among 
the  people  as  they  did  good.  Laud  was  a  singular 
man,  and  because  of  his  impetuosity  made  many 
bitter  enemies.  It  was  about  1617,  while  in  the 
deanery  of  Gloucester,  that  he  procured  from 
James  I  "direction  for  the  better  government  of 
the  university,  which  contained  the  first  official  dis- 
approbation of  the  tenets  of  the  Calvinists." 

These  bishops,  especially  Laud,  went  from  the 
field  of  theology  purely  into  the  work  of  the  State, 
so  that,  from  the  time  he  was  made  a  bishop  until 
the  end  of  his  life,  he  was  doing  more  in  the  line 


134  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

of  statecraft  than  of  Christian  theology.  Because 
of  this  he  is  not  to  be  recognized  as  a  safe  leader  in 
those  matters  which  require  subtle  distinctions  and 
careful  investigation  in  order  to  detect  error  and 
bring  to  light  in  the  clearest  manner  the  truth 
of  God. 

Fletcher's  Account  of  Laud. 

Fletcher  gives  a  just  estimate  of  Laud  and  his 
Arminianism.  "  Archbishop  Laud,"  says  Fletcher, 
"in  the  days  of  King  James  and  Charles  I,  caused 
in  the  gospel  scales  the  turn  which  then  began  to 
take  place  in  our  Church  in  favor  of  the  doctrines 
of  justice.  He  was  the  chief  instrument  which,  like 
Moses'  rod,  began  to  part  the  boisterous  sea  of  Cal- 
vinism. He  received  his  light  from  Arminius,  but 
it  was  corrupted  by  a  mixture  of  Pelagian  dark- 
ness. He  aimed  rather  at  putting  down  absolute 
reprobation  and  lawless  grace  than  at  chaining  up 
the  grace  and  reconciling  the  contending  parties 
by  recognizing  the  two  Gospel  axioms.  Hence, 
passing  beyond  the  Scripture  meridian,  he  led  most 
of  the  English  clergy  from  one  extreme  to  the 
other."     (Fletcher's  Works,  Vol.  H,  pp.  276,  277.) 

England's  Condition  as  seen  by  Hallam. 

Mr.  Hallam  has  gracefully  touched  the  condi- 
tion of  English  theological  politics  at  this  period. 
"A  far  more  permanent  controversy  sprung  up 
about   the   end  of  the  same  reign"  (James  I),  says 


PRE-WESLEYAN  ARMINIANISM.  135 

Hallam,  "which  afforded  a  pretext  for  intolerance, 
and  a  fresh  source  of  mutual  hatred.  Every  one 
of  my  readers  is  acquainted  more  or  less  with  the 
theological  tenets  of  original  sin,  free  will,  and 
predestination,  variously  taught  in  the  schools  and 
debated  by  polemical  writers  for  so  many  centuries ; 
and  few  can  be  ignorant  that  the  Articles  of  our 
own  Church,  as  they  relate  to  these  doctrines,  have 
been  very  differently  interpreted,  and  that  a  contro- 
versy about  their  meaning  had  long  been  carried  on 
with  a  pertinacity  which  could  not  have  continued 
on  so  limited  a  topic  had  the  combatants  been  merely 
influenced  by  the  love  of  truth.  Those  who  have 
no  bias  to  warp  their  judgment  will  not,  perhaps, 
have  much  hesitation  in  drawing  the  line  between, 
though  not  at  an  equal  distance  between,  the  con- 
tending parties.  It  appears,  on  the  one  hand,  that 
the  Articles  are  worded  on  some  of  these  doctrines 
with  considerable  ambiguity,  whether  we  attribute 
this  to  the  intrinsic  obscurity  of  the  subject,  to  the 
additional  difficulties  with  which  it  has  been  entan- 
gled by  theological  systems,  to  discre])ancy  of 
opinion  in  the  compilers,  or  to  their  solicitude  to 
prevent  disunion  by  adopting  formularies  to  which 
men  of  different  sentiments  might  subscribe.  It  is 
also  manifest  that  their  framers  came,  as  it  were, 
with  averted  eyes  to  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of 
predestination,  and  wisely  reprehended  those  who 
turned  their  attention  to  a  system  so  pregnant  with 
objections,  and  so  dangerous  when  needlessly  dwelt 


136  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTOHY. 

upon,  to  all  practical  piety  and  virtue.  But,  'on 
the  other  hand,  the  very  reluctance  to  inculcate 
the  tenet  is  so  expressed  as  to  manifest  their  un- 
doubting  belief  in  it ;  nor  is  it  possible,  either,  to 
assign  a  motive  for  inserting  the  Seventeenth  Ar- 
ticle, or  to  give  any  reasonable  interpretation  to  it 
upon  the  present  theory  which  passes  for  orthodox 
in  the  English  Church.  And  upon  other  subjects 
intimately  related  to  the  former — such  as  the  pen- 
alty of  original  sin,  and  the  depravation  of  human 
nature — the  Articles,  after  making  every  allowance 
for  want  of  precision,  seem  totally  irreconcila.ble 
with  the   scheme  usually   denominated  Arminian," 

Ac4E  OF  Theological  KevoLt. 

This  was  an  age  of  theological  revolt  in  Eng- 
land. The  great  leaders,  Jewell,  Nowell,  Sandys, 
Cox,  "professed  to  concur  with  the  Reformers 
of  Zurich  and  Geneva."  The  Zurich  letters,  pub- 
lished later,  evidenced  how  much  Calvin  and 
Bullinger  had,  by  their  works,  to  do  with  English 
Calvinism  and  government-shaping.  Their  works 
were  text-books  in  English  universities.  "Those 
who  did  not  hold  the  predestination  theory  were 
branded  with  reproach  by  the  names  of  Free-willers 
and  Pelagians." 

From  the  time  when  James  I  attempted  to  con- 
trol the  Synod  of  Dort  until  long  after  the  Com- 
monwealth, the  English  mind  was  dreadfully  dis- 
turbed concerning  Calvinism.     It  was  seething  and 


PR  E-  WESL  E  YA  N  A  RMINIA  NISM.  137 

bubbling  like  an  angry  pot.  King  and  court  were 
alike  disturbed.  When  the  Lambeth  Articles  were 
formed  to  teach  the  strongest  Calvinism,  and 
Archbishop  Whitgift  indorsed  them,  they  were 
met  by  Lord  Burleigh  with  disapproval ;  for  his 
faith  in  predestination,  either  Sublapsariau  or  kSu- 
pralapsarian  had  been  greatly  shaken,  and  they 
were  not  legally  sanctioned.  As  the  Greek  fathers 
were  read  more  in  England,  free  will  and  anti-pre- 
destination doctrines  were  embraced,  and  the  dog- 
mas of  Augustine,  Gottschalk,  Calvin,  and  Bul- 
linger  diminished. 

The  Episcopal  Arminian  divines  in  this  century 
were  among  the  great  theologians  of  England. 
Such  men  as  these  were  Arminian  in  their  teach- 
ing :  Cudworth,  Pierce,  Jeremy  Taylor,  Tillotson, 
Chillingworth,  Stillingfleet,  Womock,  Burnet, 
Pierson,  Sanderson,  Heylin,  Whitby,  Patrick, 
Tomline,  Copleston,  Whately,  etc.  While  these 
eminent  divines,  one  after  the  other,  took  up  the 
doctrines  of  Arminianisra,  advocating  them  in  their 
entirety,  or  in  such  parts  and  characters  as  seemed 
to  demand  their  attention,  they  were  making  a 
decided  impression  upon  the  great  mind  and  heart 
of  the  country.  The  whole  of  English  theology 
was  becoming  honeycombed  by  the  doctrines  of 
Arminius.  While  Calvinism  represented  one  ex- 
treme and  Arminianism  the  other,  between  them 
were  all  manner  of  ideas. 

It  would  not  be  surprising  if,  in  this  discussion 


1 38  ARMINIANISM  IN  EISl  OR  P. 

of  that  period,  there  would  be  found  many  things 
which  couhl  not  be  tested  and  found  genuine 
under  the  light  of  Arminianism  of  to-day. 

The  following  is  a  very  clear  statement  of  the 
theological  teaching  about  the  time  of  the  coming 
of  John  Wesley:  "Arminianism  at  last,  in  the 
Church  of  England,  became  a  negative  term,  imply- 
ing a  negation  of  Calvinism,  rather  than  any  exact 
system  of  theology  whatever.  JVIuch  that  j)assed 
for  Arminianism  was  in  fact  Pelagianism.  The 
history  of  English  theology  will  show  that  all  who 
have  deviated  from  the  golden  mean  maintained  by 
Armiuius,  between  Calvinism  on  the  one  hand  and 
Pelagianism  on  the  other,  have  fallen  into  error  as 
to  the  Trinity,  while  those  who  have'  adhered  to 
the  evangelical  doctrine  of  Arminius  have  retained 
all  the  verity  of  the  orthodox  faith.  The  pure 
doctrine  of  Arminianism  rose  again  in  England 
in  the  great  Wesleyan  Reformation  of  tlie  seven- 
teenth century." 


Chapter  VII. 

THE  POLITICAL  HOME  OF  ARMINIANISM. 

Calvinism  in  the  Netherlands — Puritanism — Arminianism — 
Eomanism  —  Under  Philip  H  of  Spain  —  Causes  for 
Philip's  Want  of  Success  —  Industries  in  the  Towns  of 
the  Netherlands— Towns  very  Important — Origin  and 
Oirowth  of  the  Guilds — Philip's  Crueltj'— Council  of 
Troubles— Alva — William  of  Orange,  the  Silent— Will- 
iam was  Stadtholder  of  Holland  etc.— The  Sea— Eng- 
land —  The  Tax  of  Alva  repudiated  —  All  Industry 
ceased — Spanish  Soldiers  starved — Fury  of  Alva — How 
his  Inhumanity  was  Checkmated — "Beggars  of  the 
Sea"— Dikes  Cut— William  Successful— Oath  o?  the 
People  —  Louis  of  Nassau  —  States  A  ssembly  ordered 
l)y  Alva  to  meet  at  The  Hague,  but  they  meet  William  at 
Dort — A  Compact — Elizabeth  and  her  Promise — Coligny 
slaughtered — Alva  afraid  of  Orange— Orange  in  Hol- 
land— Reviving  Hope — The  Turning  Point  of  Nether- 
landish Freedom — Leyden  taken  by  Orange— To  Com- 
memorate the  Event  a  University  was  founded — Many 
Protestants  went  to  Leyden  from  Catholic  France — 
William  of  Orange  assassinated —Kejoicing  at  Pome  and 
Madrid^Protestantism  not  dead — Puritanism  grow- 
ing—Success of  Arminianism— The  Political  Home  of 
Arminianism  an  Important  Factor  in  its  Permanency 
and  Success. 

The  Political  Home  of  Arminianism. 

That  little  country  on  the  northwest  coast  of 
Europe,  which  had  been  rescued  from  the  sea  by  the 
hard  and  persistent  labor  of  the  people,  was  the 
early  home  of  two  great  classes  of  thought,  founded 

139 


140  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIS  TORY. 

upon  a  solid  basis — Puritanism  and  Arniiniani.siu. 
These  two  ideas  were  by  no  means  the  same  ;  but 
they  originated  near  together,  and  possessed  some 
things  in  common.  They  represent  two  forms  of 
that  internal  struggle  of  the  enlightened  man,  who 
is  conscious  of  better  and  higher  destinies  and  priv- 
ileges than  had  been  accorded  him  in  society  as  it 
had  existed.  Puritanism  did  not  take  hold  of  the 
great  doctrines  of  religion  as  found  in  Christianity, 
and  seek  to  amplify,  teach,  and  enforce  them. 
Her  mission  appeared  to  be  the  survey  of  the  po- 
litical aspects  of  all  moral  and  civil  questions,  and 
give  direction  to  the  human  forces  to  building  up 
of  a  country  on  sound  principles  of  human  freedom 
and  right,  so  that  all  citizens  should  be  able  to  en- 
joy the  highest  possible  civil  liberty.  Arminianism 
took  hold  of  and  discusssed  great  religious  doctrines, 
those  essential  to  personal  salvation,  cleared  away 
the  mystery  and  cruelty,  the  mental  and  spiritual 
darkness  surrounding  the  old  Calvinistic  doctrines 
of  predestination  and  reprobation.  She  sought  to 
lift  up  the  despondent  heart  of  sinful  men  to  the 
spiritual  freedom  of  salvation  provided  for  all  men, 
and  received  by  all  on  the  condition  of  "repent- 
ance towards  God,  and  faith  toward  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ." 

Puritanism  was  civil  in  its  trend  ;  Arminianism 
was  spiritual  in  its  highest  efforts.  Both  were  re- 
volts. Puritanism  was  a  revolt  from  illegal  usur- 
pation,  and    Arminianism    was  a  revolt    from    the 


POLITICAL  HOME    OF  ARMINIANIHM.      l4l 

dogma  binding  the  mind  and  heart  of  mankind 
under  a  cruel  predestiuationism.  They  originated  in 
their  new  character  in  Holland  or  the  Netherlands, 
and  have  both  found  their  highest  sphere  of  action 
in  the  United  States  of  America. 

It  will  serve  our  purpose  to  speak  briefly  of  the 
geographical  and  political  relations  of  the  early 
home  of  Arminianism.  The  country  on  the  north- 
west coast  of  Europe  was  called,  sometimes,  the  Low 
Countries,  because  so  much  of  it  lay  below  the 
sea-level,  and  whose  waters  were  kept  out  by  im- 
mense dikes  or  levees,  against  which  the  breakers 
surged  and  roared,  wasting  their  fury  on  walls 
reared  by  brave  hearts  and  hands ;  sometimes  called 
Netherlands,  or  Northlands,  because  of  their  rela- 
tion to  France  and  Normandy ;  sometimes  called 
Holland,  or  Hollo wland,  the  largest  State  in  the 
confederacy.  The  territory  was  small,  being  only 
about  half  the  size  of  England,  when  the  whole 
seventeen  are  considered.  Ten  of  these  little 
States,  those  on  the  south  and  now  forming  Belgium, 
were  Catholic,  and  were  ruled  by  a  foreign  Cath- 
olic prince.  The  seven  lying  to  the  north  revolted 
from  Catholicism,  and  were  Protestant.  The  for- 
eign Roman  Catholic  power  sought  to  seize  and 
hold  these  seven  provinces,  and  convert  them  to  the 
religion  and  service  of  Rome.  But  they  had  in- 
born a  spirit  of  independence,  both  in  the  power 
to  govern  and  the  power  to  think,  and  refused 
obedience  to  a  foreign  power.  These  men  of  ster- 
10 


142  A  RMIXIA  NISM  IX  JUS  TOR  Y. 

ling  worth,  iudependence  of  spirit,  and  nobility  of 
character,  united  and  formed  the  "Dutch  Repub- 
lic," known  as  the  "United  Netherlands."  It  had 
only  about  13,000  square  miles  of  territory,  water 
and  land,  and  to  possess  this  from  the  restless 
North  Sea  required  a  continuous  fight.  It  had  no 
natural  boundaries  on  the  south  and  east,  by  which 
an  invading  foe  might  be  kept  out.  Yet  it  car- 
ried on  a  war  for  eighty  years  against  the  cruel 
Roman  foe,  who  sought  the  entire  destruction  of 
the  Republic.  These  seven  States  were  only  one- 
fourth  as  large  as  England.  "Little,  historic 
Greece  was  half  as  large  again."  She  was  one- 
twentieth  as  large  as  France,  a  Roman  Catholic 
country,  and,  when  compared  with  Europe,  was  but 
one  three-hundredths  of  the  whole.  This  little  spot 
of  country,  filled  with  sturdy  and  determined  peo- 
ple, bravely,  fearlessly,  and  continually  withstood 
the  encroachments  of  foes  by  sea  and  land.  In 
this  country  was  the  new  birth  of  Puritanism  and 
Arminianism.  Full  attention  to  Puritanism  will 
reveal  why  and  how  she  lived,  and  why  Arminian- 
ism found  a  good  soil  in  which  to  grow. 

At  the  time  of  the  revolt  of  Puritanism  in  the 
Netherlands,  the  seventeen  States  were  under  the 
domination  of  I*hilip  II  of  Spain,  a  ])rince  of  ab- 
solute sujDcrstition,  and  of  a  cruelty  of  nature  not 
to  be  excelled  even  by  the  cruel  and  blind  old  Tor- 
quemada.  The  old  emperor,  the  Castilian  Charles 
\ ,  had  become  sick  and  morose.     The  pains  of  the 


POLITICAL  HOME  OF  ARMINIANISM.      143 

gout  were  so  excruciating  that  they  greatly  added 
to  the  weariuess  of  ruling.  He  abdicated  the 
throne,  and  placed  upon  it  his  son,  Philip  II. 
Charles  V  had  never  given  himself  much  concern 
about  the  conduct  of  these  States  of  the  north. 
Each  State  had  "  an  hereditary  ruler,  called  a  duke, 
marquis,  count,  or  baron."  The  overlord,  Philip  II, 
a2)pointed  "governors  or  stadtholders,  to  represent 
his  sovereignty  in  the  various  provinces,  and  a 
regent  to  govern  the  whole."  In  these  States  were 
about  0,000,000  people.  They  were  an  industrious 
people,  which  made  them  unusually  prosperous. 
They  studied  much,  and  became  very  intelligent. 
While  Charles  V  lived  and  ruled,  the  people  had 
but  little  of  which  they  complained ;  but  when 
Philip  came  into  power,  they  at  once  realized  the 
will  and  cruelty  of  the  new  ruler. 

Why  did  Philip  II  never  succeed  in  ruling  the 
Netherlands  ?  Mr.  Campbell,  in  his  excellent  book, 
"The  Puritan  in  Holland,  England,  and  America," 
gives  the  reason  :  ' '  That  successor  [of  Charles  V — 
Philip  II]  never  understood  the  people  committed 
to  his  rule,  knew  nothing  of  their  spirit,  and  could 
not  comprehend  why  they  so  insisted  on  their  civil 
and  religious  rights.  Throughout  the  rest  of  Eu- 
rope, the  feudal  tyranny  having  passed  away,  the 
monarchs  were  absorbing  all  the  power.  Such  was 
the  case  in  neighboring  France,  in  Sjjain,  where 
Philip  was  born  and  reared,  and  in  England,  where 
he  found  a  wife.     Whv  should  he  not  govern  these 


144  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIS  TOR  T. 

provinces  in  the  same  manner  as  the  other  parts  of 
his  dominions  ?  That  he  couhl  not,  he  discovered 
before  his  death."     (Vol.  I,  p.  137.) 

The  situation  of  the  Netherhinds  was  such  that 
the  greater  part  of  their  industry  must  be  carried 
on  in  town.  Even  the  agricultural  enterprises  con- 
tributed to  the  business  carried  forward  in  the 
towns.  Since  the  millions  of  people  could  not  find 
ample  scope  for  their  energies  in  the  soil,  they 
naturally  developed  manufacturing.  The  country 
became  dotted  with  walled  towns.  In  a  little  while 
they  became  strong  enough  for  defense  against  for- 
eign foes.  This  gave  the  people  a  taste  for  liberty 
and  independency.  Already  a  quasi-Puritanism 
was  showing  itself  It  could  be  but  a  little  way 
before  Puritanism  will  be  full-fledged. 

There  grew  up  almost  insensibly  the  guilds — 
some  for  mutual  protection,  some  for  trades,  and 
some  for  social  interests.  While  it  is  doubtful  if 
any  political  complexion  was  given  them  at  the 
outset,  in  the  Netherlands  they  soon  "assumed  the 
government  of  towns."  The  name  of  earlier  times 
gave  place  to  another,  expressing  the  idea  of  "  com- 
mune." About  the  guilds  was  a  semi-religious  at- 
mosphere ;  for,  on  admission  to  membership,  the 
candidate  "took  an  oath  to  uphold  divine  worship, 
and  to  serve  his  count  legally  and  with  all  his 
might."  Once  in  the  guild,  there  was  a  wonderful 
equality  among  the  members.  There  was  a  real 
democracy.     When  the  time  came  to  assume  polit- 


POLITICAL  HOME  OF  AEMINIANISM.      145 

ical  relations  and  duties,  it  was  but  natural  for 
workmen  to  carry  their  ideas  of  equality  and  re- 
ligion into  their  citizen  responsibilities. 

Many  cities  came  to  be  of  so  much  conse- 
quence as  to  obtain  a  charter,  and  with  the  charter 
certain  extraordinary  rights  and  privileges  of  a 
social,  religious,  and  political  character.  They 
greatly  increased  their  means  of  defense.  They 
became  jiractically  impregnable.  They  molested  no 
one,  and  were  not  willing  that  any  should  molest 
them.  The  smaller  towns  contiguous  to  the  larger 
cities,  naturally  placed  themselves  under  the  pro- 
tection of  these  fastnesses.  In  turn,  the  smaller 
towns  lent  their  aid  to  the  enriching  of  the  cities 
in  return  for  this  protection.  A  common  interest 
led  all  the  chartered  cities  and  their  dependent 
towns  to  a  mutual  interchange  of  sentiment,  so  that, 
for  the  protection  of  all,  they  were  united.  They 
made  a  common  cause.  It  was  against  their  free- 
dom-loving, liberty-enjoying,  wealth-obtaining,  and 
worship-observing  people  that  Philip  II  hurled  his 
forces,  to  be  met  by  a  sad  but  certain  defeat. 

When  Philip  II  came  to  attempt  to  exercise  his 
power  in  the  Netherlands  in  cruelty,  that  people, 
so  unused  to  such  things,  mildly  protested.  Then 
the  Inquisition  and  Margaret  of  Parma  were  sent  to 
quell  the  rising  tide  of  insubordination.  Margaret 
found  a  power  too  great  to  meet  and  overthrow. 
There  were  uprisings  in  various  quarters.  Then 
Alva,  the  duke,  as  cruel  a  Spaniard,  as  unscru2)u- 


146  A  RMINIANISM  IN  HIS  TOR  Y. 

lous  a  Catholic,  and  as  pui)erstitious  a  Koiuanist  as 
ever  lived,  was  sent  to  take  command,  with  ten 
thousand  picked  men  of  the  Spanish  army.  He 
entered  the  Netherlands,  organized  the  "Council  of 
Troubles,"  which,  by  its  inhuman  practices,  soon 
came  to  be  called  the  "  Council  of  Blood."  The 
story  of  the  bloody  scenes  of  this  period  is  horrible 
in  the  extreme.  The  very  rivers  were  flooded  with 
human  blood,  and  the  very  lakes  and  inlets  were 
colored  with  gore.  The  wails  of  anguish  that  went 
up  from  this  country  were  enough  to  move  a  heart 
of  stone. 

"  IMan's  inhumanity'  to  man 
Made  countless  thousands  mourn." 

Alva  commenced  his  inhuman  butchery  in 
August,  1507. 

Reared  at  the  court  of  Charles  V  was  William 
of  Orange,  the  man  of  destiny,  who  was  ultimately 
to  deliver  his  people.  It  was  upon  the  arm  of  Will- 
iam of  Orange  that  Charles  V  leaned  when  he 
performed  "the  magnificent  ceremony  of  his  ab- 
dication." While  at  the  Court  of  8t.  Cloud,  AVill- 
iam  developed  a  quality  which  gave  him  the  name 
of  "  Silent."  It  Avas  when  the  King  of  France  re- 
vealed to  him  his  league  with  Philip  of  Spain  to 
crush  out  heresy  everywhere  in  his  kingdoms.  Si- 
lently he  listened.  Great  thoughts  filled  his  mind, 
and  great  purposes  filled  his  brave  heart.  He  re- 
solved to  thwart  the  purpose  of  Philip  II  regarding 
his  OAvn  loved  native  Netherlands. 


POLITICAL    HOME  OF  ARMINIANISM       147 

Philip  appointed  William  of  Orange  Stadth older 
of  Holland,  Zealand,  and  Utrecht.  It  was  a  long 
way  and  a  rough  way  before  William  could  lay 
the  foundation  of  the  Dutch  Republic.  Caution, 
coupled  with  steadiness  of  purpose,  ever  kept  him 
from  any  rash  acts  that  would  lead  to  a  thwarting  of 
his  great  purpose.  He,  of  all  others,  understood 
what  was  meant  by  the  coming  of  Alva.  He  went 
into  voluntary  exile.  Protestants  began  to  rally  to 
his  aid.  In  1568  he  hoped  the  time  had  arrived 
for  decisive  and  successful  action.  So  he  hurled  his 
few  troops  against  Alva,  and  failed.  Orange  fled 
to  France,  and  joined  the  Huguenots.  He  was  the 
warm  friend  of  Coligny. 

The  sea  was  destined  to  be  the  stronghold  and 
last  friend  of  the  Netherlanders.  Privateers,  bear- 
ing the  commission  of  the  Prince  of  Cond^,  preyed 
upon  some  rich  Spanish  merchantmen.  Some  of 
these  merchant  vessels  fled  for  safety  into  English 
ports,  and  Elizabeth  seized  the  vessels,  and  con- 
verted the  money  to  her  use.  Alva  was  furious. 
Elizabeth  promised  restoration,  but  it  was  never 
made.  He  appealed  to  Philip,  in  Spain.  Delay 
followed  delay,  until  four  years  had  passed  before 
anything  came  of  it.  Matters  continued  to  go  on 
in  the  Netherlands  in  a  fierce  persecution.  The 
people  were  roused.  They  were  ready  for  any  revolt. 
In  Spain,  gold  was  becoming  scarce,  and  the  stream 
of  supplies  failed  to  flow  to  Alva,  and  great  dis- 
content  arose  among   his   Spanish   troops.     In   his 


148  A  RMINIA  X]SM  IN  JUSTOR  Y. 

vexation  and  distress,  Alva  proposed  to  tax  directly 
all  the  land  of  the  Netherlands  one  ])er  cent  per 
annum,  and  one-tenth  of  the  selling  price  of  the 
sales  of  personal  property.  He  submitted  this 
])roposition  to  the  Htates  Assemblies  in  1569,  but 
they  received  it  with  indignation.  Alva  would  not 
modify  his  demand.  At  last,  Utrecht  alone  refused 
to  accede  to  his  demands,  and  her  people  were  sub- 
jected to  a  heavy  tine.  The  leaven  Avas  working. 
The  Protestant  indignation  was  deepening  in  the 
Netherlands.  The  time  would  soon  be  ripe  for  an- 
other blow  to  be  struck  in  a  revolt  that  should 
shiver  Alva  and  the  Spanish  hopes  forever,  so  far 
as  Holland  was  concerned. 

The  heroic  Netherlauders,  repudiating  the  tax 
of  Alva,  suspended  business.  All  industry  came  to 
a  st()[).  Bread,  meat,  and  beer  could  not  be  ibund. 
The  people  husbanded  the  little  reserve  they  had, 
but  the  Spauish  soldiers  were  hungry.  Money 
would  not  purchase  food.  The  wheels  of  industry 
had  all  suddenly  ceased  to  hum.  Starvation  was 
before  the  army.  To  say  that  Alva  was  angry  is  to 
speak  mildly  of  his  mental  state.  He  was  furious. 
One  April  night,  in  1572,  he  ordered  the  court  ex- 
ecutioners to  seize  eighteen  of  Brussels's  most  re- 
spected tradesmen,  and  hang  them,  each  before  his 
own  door,  and  see  if  this  vengeance  would  not  start 
trade  again.  That  order  was  never  executed.  That 
night,  while  Alva  least  expected  it,  by  the  good 
providence  of  (iod,  the  "Beggars  of  the  Sea,"  with 


POLITICAL  HOME    OF  ARMINIANISM.      149 

a  fleet  of  twenty-four  ships,  fell  upon  the  coast. 
AVilliani  de  la  Marck,  "a  bloodthirsty,  savage,  law- 
less, and  licentious  ruffian,"  commanded.  He  struck 
at  Brill.  He  easily  obtained  possession  of  this 
walled  town.  His  great  thought  was  to  plunder 
the  town;  but  William  de  Blois,  whose  brother  Alva 
had  murdered,  proposed  to  give  this  place  over  to 
William  of  Orange.  This  advice  was  heeded.  The 
word  of  this  success  fell  upon  Alva's  ears  as  omi- 
nous. He  ceased  the  executions,  and  ordered  sol- 
diers to  Brill.  Ten  companies  marched  from  Utrecht. 
The  sturdy  Brill ians,  having  had  a  taste  of  suc- 
cess, were  thoroughly  aroused.  They  cut  the  dikes, 
flooded  the  country  and  the  city,  and  burned  a 
few  transports  to  keep  them  from  falling  into  the 
hands  of  the  Spaniards.  Defeated,  the  soldiers  of 
Alva  retired.  The  people  took  an  oath  to  support 
William  of  Orange.  This  prince  was  arranging  to 
make  an  assault  on  the  Spanish  at  another  point, 
but  his  plans  were  not  complete. 

Louis  of  Nassau,  a  younger  brother  of  Oi-auge, 
was  a  brave  patriot,  and,  next  to  Coligny,  the  idol 
of  the  Huguenots.  With  a  small  force,  he  had 
fallen  upon  Mons,  in  Hainault,  the  southern  State 
of  the  Netherlands,  and  had  captured  it.  He  was 
an  ardent,  outspoken  Christian  and  Protestant. 
This  occurred  in  May,  1572.  Alva,  pushed  by  his 
losses,  called  to  the  States  Assembly  of  Holland  to 
meet  at  The  Hague.  They  met,  not  at  The  Hague 
and    with    Alva,   but    at    Dort    Avith    William    of 


150  A  R MIXTA  XISM  IX  IIISTOIi  V. 

Orauge.  A  compact  was  entered  into  between  -the 
Assembly  of  Holland  and  William,  and  troops  were 
raised  at  once,  to  be  paid  by  the  cities.  On  the 
27th  of  August,  1572,  AVilliam,  at  the  head  of 
24,000  men,  began  his  march  toward  Mons,  to  de- 
liver his  brother  Louis.  Everywhere  William  was 
received  by  the  cities  and  people  with  great  demon- 
strations of  joy.  Men  came  to  his  standard.  All 
was  prosperous,  and  soon,  it  was  hoped,  the  hated 
Spaniard  would  be  conquered,  and  swept  from  the 
States  of  the  Netherlands.  Just  in  this  blaze  of 
excitement,  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew's  Day 
occurred  in  France.  Coligny,  the  bosom  friend  of 
William,  fell  by  an  assassin's  hand.  The  army 
William  hoped  to  have  come  to  his  standard  from 
France,  now  could  not  be  obtained.  Elizabeth  of 
England  had  promised  aid  to  the  Hollanders,  but 
she  began  to  dally  with  Philip  and  Alva,  hoping  to 
gain  some  benefit  for  her  kingdom  in  the  coming 
crash. 

Alva  feared  to  meet  Orange  in  the  field.  Mons 
gave  up  to  the  Spanish  troops.  France  and  Eng- 
land both  deserted  him.  Just  as  he  seemed  in  the 
moment  of  greatest  success,  the  blight  of  darkness 
fell  upon  him,  and  hope  died.  AVhat  could  he  do  ? 
His  army  was  disbanded,  and  Orange  went  al- 
most alone  into  Holland,  where  he  might  wait,  as 
God  willed,  with  becoming  endurance  and  patience. 
Orange  believed  himself  the  man  of  destiny.  He 
believed  that  God  designed  religious  and  civil  free- 


POLITICAL   HOME  OF .ARMINIANISM.      151 

dom  for  him  and  his  people,  and  he  was  the  man 
to  secure  them.  The  Christian  Romanist  was  now  a 
Christian  Protestant.  Toleration,  religious  liberty, 
civil  freedom,  were  terms  he  loved  to  dwell  upon, 
for  they  were  words  consistent  with  the  eternal  truth 
and  word  of  God. 

The  story  of  reviving  hope,  of  the  defense  of 
the  cities  and  homes  of  Holland,  the  maintaining  of 
a  siege  for  seven  months  against  the  combined  forces 
of  Spain,  the  cutting  of  the  dikes  and  flooding  of 
the  country,  the  strength  and  courage  of  William, 
the  power  of  endurance  of  himself  and  people,  the 
butchery  at  Haarlem  by  the  Spanish,  after  they  sur- 
rendered on  terms  of  promised  protection,  the  hero- 
ism of  men  and  women  who  fought  and  suffered  to 
the  last,  the  recall  of  Alva,  the  coming  of  Don 
Louis  de  Requesens,  Grand  Commander  of  Castile, 
and  the  tide  of  victory  at  Middleburg,  as  well  as  on 
the  sea,  are  scenes  and  incidents  vividly  drawn  by 
the  historian,  and  evidence  how  much  of  faith, 
bravery,  and  courage  were  required  to  gain  relig- 
ious freedom.  The  date  at  which  may  be  set  the 
turning  point  for  Netherlandish  freedom  was  Febru- 
ary, 1574. 

Leyden  was  soon  after  attacked  by  Orange,  and, 
after  a  brilliant  siege,  was  taken.  Twice  the  Span- 
ish forces  attempted  to  retake  Leyden  ;  but  Orange 
finally,  by  the  flood,  rescued  the  city,  and  defeated 
the  hated  Spanish.  Here  Puritanism  found,  thirty 
years  later,  her  strongest  hold  and  warmest  friends. 


152  .1 RMINIANISM  IN  HISTOll Y. 

iSoniehow  Leyden  became  Btrongly  connected  wjth 
the  "  cause  of  religion  and  learning." 

To  commemorate  this  glorious  delivery  from 
Spanish  rule,  Orange  and  the  Estates  founded  the 
University  of  Leyden,  Learning,  religion,  and 
liberty — here  they  found  a  home  and  a  center  from 
which  to  radiate.  The  University  of  Leyden  was  des- 
tined to  be  a  tremendous  power  for  building  up  and 
maintaining  Dutch  liberty  and  Protestant  Christian- 
ity. Great  names  have  been  connected  with  the 
University  of  Leyden.  John  Van  Uer  Does,  the 
first  curator;  Justus  Lipsius,  of  the  chair  of  His- 
tory; John  Drusus,  the  Orientalist;  (Jomarus,  and 
Arminius,  the  great  theologians;  G.  J.  Vossius,  the 
ce]el)iated  grammai'ian  ;  Peter  Paaw,  the  botanist ; 
Hemsterhuys,  the  scientific  student  of  Greek  ; 
Boerhaave,  Albinus,  aiid  many  others,  eminent  in 
their  several  departments, — were  great  lights  at 
Leyden. 

From  Catholic  France  Leyden  drew  much  of 
the  Protestant  element.  She  had  within  herself 
men  by  the  thousands  to  be  led  along  the  blessed 
pathway  into  the  highest  realms  of  learning.  By 
this  school  slie  was  destined  to  Aviekl  an  influence 
for  two  hundred  years  in  the  Dutch  Republic,  that 
should  be  the  pride  of  the  world. 

William  of  Orange  took  a  prominent  place  in 
Dutch  ]il)erty.  He  was  foremost  in  all  the  plans 
for  her  advancement.  He  couhl  not  be  corrupted 
by  Spanish  gold,  or  promises  of  the  greatest  things 


POLITICAL   HOME  OF  ARMINIANISM.      153 

in  Spanish  gift.  A  price  was  set  upon  his  head. 
Assassins  were  encouraged  to  kill  hiiu.  The  at- 
tempt was  made  in  1582,  but  failed.  The  terrible 
deed  was  accomplished,  July  10,  1584,  by  a  bullet 
sped  by  Balthasar  Gerard.  While  Rome  and 
Madrid,  the  pope  and  Philip  rejoiced,  and  sang  the 
Te  Deum,  as  on  the  occasion  of  the  base  assassina- 
tions of  St.  Bartholomew's  Day  in  France,  the  man 
of  God,  the  silent  hero,  died  praying,  "  God  have 
mercy  on  my  poor  people."  The  world  lost  a  man, 
Holland  a  brave  defender,  liberty  an  heroic  cham- 
pion, and  Christianity  a  strong  support. 

Puritanism  did  not  die  with  William  of  Orange, 
as  many  antagonists  hoped.  It  lived.  It  realized 
the  foe  it  had  still  to  meet  and  vanquish.  It  saw 
the  need  of  a  strong  arm  on  which  to  lean,  a  deter- 
mining mind,  quick  to  discern,  and  ready  to  plan 
for  victory,  a  sharp  and  active  understanding,  to 
detect  the  dissimulation  of  the  basest  of  foes,  as  un- 
scrupulous as  Satau,  and  a  courage  that  would  not 
quail  wheu  facing  the  vilest  of  men,  and  uplift  hu- 
manity, and  disenthrall  the  evil.  Where  should 
such  a  one  be  found  ? 

Puritanism  became  strong  in  the  Netherlands. 
Protestanism  grew  rank  by  her  side.  Puritanism 
and  Protestantism  were  not  synonymous,  nor  could 
they  be  used  interchangeably,  but  they  grew  so 
near  together  that  they  seemed  to  have  common  in- 
terests and  a  common  destiny.  Determined  men 
offered  life,  fortune,   ease,  and  family  for  the   sue- 


154  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

cess  of  Puritauisin  aud  Protestantism.  The  re- 
sources of  this  goodly  land  lay  at  the  feet  of  these 
two  great  and  essential  elements  to  the  grand  suc- 
cess of  religious  and  civil  liberty. 

The  home  of  Arminianism  was  within  the  won- 
derful Netherlands.  It  had  interests  in  common 
with  Puritanism.  It  was  an  essential  element  of 
Protestantism.  It  sought  to  have  and  enjoy  civil 
and  religious  liberty.  In  Amsterdam  and  Leyden, 
even  in  the  great  Memorial  University  of  AVilliam 
of  Orange,  within  nineteen  years  from  the  assassi- 
nation of  the  Silent  Man,  it  was  born — born  to  a 
sturdy  life,  to  a  period  of  trouble,  but  to  vigorous 
thought  and  an  ultimate  triumph. 

The  Arminians,  while  denying  predestination, 
"  proclaimed  a  practical  theory,  which  was  more  im- 
portant "  to  the  people  than  any  gone  before  in  the 
struggle  to  found  a  republic.  "They  claimed  that 
in  religious  matters  the  State  was  supreme,  that  it 
should  appoint  the  ministers,  and  that  it  alone 
should  have  the  regulation  of  Church  discipline  and 
dogma.  This  was  the  doctrine  which  in  the  end 
brought  King  James  and  the  whole  High  Church 
party  of  England  into  the  ranks  of  Arminianism, 
although  they  fought  its  theology  for  many  years. 
It  was  utterly  repudiated  by  the  Anabaptists,  who 
believed  in  the  separation  of  Church  aud  State." 
(The  Puritan,  etc.,  Vol.  II,  p.  302.) 

"In  1606,  three  years  after  Armiuius  had  be- 
gun  his   teaching,  the   new   principles   had   gained 


POLITICAL   HOME  OF  ARMIMIANISM.      155 

such  headway  that  the  clerical  party  called  for  a 
National  Synod  to  settle  the  religious  dissensions. 
At  this  time,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind,  Barne- 
veldt  was  supreme  in  the  States  General.  The 
municipal  Councils,  which  lay  at  the  foundations 
of  the  Government,  were  mostly  in  favor  of  the  Ar- 
miuians,  who  supported  their  ecclesiastical  preten- 
sions, and  believed  in  giving  them  more  power. 
Above^the  municipal  Councils  stood  the  Assemblies 
of  the  Provinces,  imbued  with  the  same  ideas. 
These  were  the  bodies  which  then  controlled  the 
situation.  Under  such  conditions  Barneveldt  de- 
clared openly  in  favor  of  a  National  Synod,  thus 
fully  recognizing  the  principle  that  the  Netherlands 
were  a  nation,  with  full  power  to  i-egulate  all  its 
affairs,  despite  any  parchment  treaties  of  the  past." 

Thus  is  traced  the  political  home  of  Arminian- 
ism.  It  became  an  important  factor  in  the  com- 
plete development  of  the  Dutch  Republic.  It 
even  stood  by  the  great  principles  of  nationality. 
It  was  the  strong  ally  of  education,  the  highest 
culture,  the  best  kind  of  civil  liberty,  and  perfect 
toleration.  It  enriched  literature.  It  studied  and 
unfolded  science.  It  entered  the  field  of  specula- 
tive and  constitutional  law.  It  reveled  in  the 
glories  of  philosophy.  It  glorified  theology,  and 
advocated  the  religion  of  the  heart. 

God  had  a  mission  for  Arminianism.  He  pro- 
posed that  it  should  be  cari'ied  out. 


Chapter  Vlll. 

ARMINIANISM  IN  ITS  WKSLEYAN  GROWTH. 

Wesleyanisiu  a  Kelbrniation — Hamuel  Wesley's  Kevolt  from 
Calvinism— When  John  Wesley  embraced  Arminian- 
ism — Sermon  on  God's  Free  (h'acc — Gropings  for  Free- 
dom from  Predestination  in  a  Letter  to  his  Mother — 
Her  Reply — Mr.  Wesley's  Letter  from  Wroote— Ser- 
mon— His  Eight  Reasons  for  antagonizing  Predestina- 
tion— Dialogue  of  1741— His  Work  on  "The  Scripture 
Doctrine  Concerning  Predestination"— FiAir  Reasons  for 
objecting  to  Absolute  Predestination — Mr.  Wesley  in 
the  Clear  Light  of  (iod's  Love— His  Delight  to  preach 
Arminianism — The  Arminian  Magazine — Why  estab- 
lished— Why  called  "Arminian" — Clmracter  of  the 
Magazine — The  First  Article  on  James  Arininius — Sep- 
aration between  John  Wesley  and  George  Whitefield — 
Cause — Whitefield  Calvinistic — Worked  together  in  the 
Kingswood  School  Growing  Differences— Whitelield 
an  Evangelist — Wesley  an  Organizer — Whitefield  be- 
came an  Ardent  Calvinist  by  Contact  with  New  Eng- 
land Calvinists— Whitelield's  Letter  to  Weslej'— 
Reply— Whitefield's  Letter  to  Wesley  from  Cape 
Lopen — Calvinism  in  America  of  a  Strong  Type — 
Letter  from  Boston  on  ' '  Sinless  Perfection  ' ' — Calvin- 
i.stic  Controversy — Howell  Harris  and  his  Letters  to 
Wesley  on  Calvinism — Wesley's  Replies— Countess  of 
Huntingdon — The  Wliitetieldians  as  Methodists  were 
Calvinistic — Whitefield  would  not  imite  with  Weslej^ — 
Whitefield's  Death — Wesley's  Consistent  Movements — 
Arminianism  Triumphant. 

TiiR    ministers    and    members  of   the    Scottish 
Church  of  the  michlle  of  the  hist  century  hated  the 
Arminiaus  as  much  as  they  did  sin  and  Satan.      In 
156 


WESLE  YAN  A  R  MINI  A  NISM.  1 5  7 

their  eniimeratiou  of  errors,  Arruiniauisiu  was  classed 
aloug  with  others  considered  as  the  worst.  "Do  you 
disown  all  Popish,  Arian,  Sociuiau,  Armiuian,  Bou- 
rignon,  and  other  doctrines  and  tenets  and  opinions 
whatever,  contrary  to  and  inconsistent  with  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith  ?"  asked  they. 

The  Nonjuring  Presbyterians  were  for  years 
called  the  "Nons."  To  their  creed  was  added  the 
following  sharply  antagonistic  addenda:  "I  leave 
my  protest,"  says  a  stern  Caiueroniau,  "against  all 
sectarian  errors,  heresies,  and  blasphemies,  partic- 
ularly against  Ariauism,  Erastianism,  Socinianisra, 
Quakerism,  Deism,  Bourignonism,  Familism,  Skep- 
ticism, Arminiauisra,  Lutheranism,  Pelagianism, 
Campbellism,  Whitefieldianism,  Latitudinarianism, 
and  Independency,  and  all  other  sects  and  sorts 
that  maintain  any  error,  heresy,  or  blasphemy  that 
is  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God,  and  all  erroneous 
speeches  vented  from  pulpits,  pages,  or  in  public  or 
private  discourses ;  and  against  all  toleration 
granted  or  given,  at  any  time,  in  favor  of  these  or 
any  other  errors,  heresies  or  blasphemies,  or  blas- 
phemous heretics,  particularly  the  toleration  granted 
by  the  sectarian  usurper,  Oliver  Cromwell,  the 
Autichristiau  toleration  granted  by  the  popish 
Duke  of  York,  and  the  present  continued  tolera- 
tion granted  by  that  wicked  Jezebel,  the  pretended 
Queen,  Anne."  (From  Burton,  IX,  60,  as  quoted 
by  Stanley  in  his  Lectures  on  the  Church  of  Scot- 
laud,  p.  %Q.) 

11 


158  A  E  MINI  A  NISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

Wesleyan  Armiuianisni  Avaf>  a  reformation,. and 
was  directly  antagonistic  to  all  that  had  been  taught 
in  the  previous  years  of  predestination  according 
to  the  Genevan  theory.  jNfr.  Wesley's  father, 
though  to  what  extent  may  not  be  known,  had 
broken  away  from  the  rigid  doctrines  of  the  earlier 
times.  It  will  be  a  matter  of  pleasure  and  profit 
to  follow  the  mind  of  ]VIr.  Wesley  as  he  was  break- 
ing away  from  the  shackles  of  the  old  theology,  and 
found  in  the  interpretation  of  Scripture  satisfaction 
to  his  own  mind  and  heart  that  Jesus  Christ  had 
made  a  sufficient  atonement  for  every  ruined  son 
of  Adam  who  would  come  with  repentance  and 
faith,  and  seek  the  pardon  of  a  reconciled  God. 

Mr.  Wesley  came  into  the  full  acknowledgment 
of  Arminianism  at  an  early  period  in  his  ministry; 
for  why  should  he  have  crossed  the  ocean  to  preach 
the  gospel  to  Indians  and  those  who  were  destitute 
of  religion  on  this  continent  if  he  had  not  felt  it 
possible  for  those  who  heard  his  preaching  to  turn 
and  live  ?  When  he  was  first  an  Arminian  is  a 
question  of  interest.  In  his  first  sermon,  in  1738, 
preached  at  Oxford  soon  after  his  conversion,  on 
"By  grace  are  ye  saved  through  faith,"  and  in  the 
same  year  a  sermon  on  "God's  Free  Grace,"  he 
taught  that  "the  grace  or  love  of  God,  whence 
Cometh  our  salvation,  is  free  in  all,  and  free  for  all." 

Mr.  Wesley's  first  gropiugs  after  freedom  from 
predestination  are  found  in  a  letter  to  his  mother, 
of  June   18,   1725,  in  which  he  speaks  of  reading 


WESLEYAN  ARMINIANIS31  159 

Thomas  a  Kempis  and  Dr.  Taylor's  "Holy  Living 
and  Dying."  "If  we  dwell  in  Christ,  and  Christ 
in  us — which  we  will  not  do  unless  we  are  regen- 
erate— certainly  we  must  be  sensible  of  it.  If  we 
can  never  have  any  certainty  of  being  in  a  state 
of  salvation,  good  reason  it  is  that  every  moment 
should  be  spent,  not  in  joy,  but  in  fear  and  trem- 
bling ;  and  then  undoubtedly,  in  this  life,  we  are 
of  all  men  the  most  miserable.  God  deliver  us 
from  such  a  fearful  expectation  as  this !"  (Tyer- 
man's  Life  of  Wesley,  Vol.  I,  p.  35.)  Here  Wes- 
ley was  feeling  after  "God's  love  to  all  and  the 
privilege  of  living  in  a  state  of  conscious  salvation." 
His  mother  wrote,  July  21,  1725,  a  letter  touching 
upon  this  subject,  to  which  he  replied,  July  29, 
1725:  "What  shall  I  say  of  predestination?  An 
everlasting  purpose  of  God  to  deliver  some  from 
damnation  does,  I  suppose,  exclude  all  from  that 
deliverance  who  are  not  chosen.  And  if  it  was 
inevitably  decreed  from  eternity  that  such  a  de- 
terminate part  of  mankind  should  be  saved,  and 
none  besides  them,  a  vast  majority  of  the  world 
were  only  born  to  eternal  death,  without  so  much 
as  a  possibility  of  avoiding  it.  How  is  this  con- 
sistent with  either  the  Divine  justice  or  mercy  ? 
Is  it  merciful  to  ordain  a  creature  to  everlasting 
misery?  Is  it  just  to  punish  man  for  crimes  which 
he  could  not  but  commit?  That  God  should  be 
the  author  of  sin  and  injustice  (which  must,  I  think, 
be  the  consequences  of  maintaining  this  opinion). 


160  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

is  a  coutiadictiou  to  the  clearest  ideas  we  hav-e  of 
the  Divine  nature  and  perfections."  (Tyernian, 
Vol.  I,  p.  39.) 

Mr.  Wesley  was  coming  out  of  his  intellectual 
conflict  into  a  full  view  of  the  weakness  of  predes- 
tination. While  his  views  on  faith  were  not  up 
to  the  Arminian  view,  still  he  was  approaching  it. 
His  mother  was  a  superior  counselor.  One  of  her 
greatest  letters,  and  one  whose  doctrine  regarding 
predestination  he  fully  indorsed,  was  written  from 
Wroote,  August  18,  1725.  In  it  she  says:  "I 
have  often  wondered  that  men  should  be  so  vain 
as  to  amuse  themselves  with  searching  into  the  de- 
crees of  God,  which  no  human  wit  can  fathom, 
and  do  not  rather  employ  their  time  and  powers  in 
working  out  their  salvation.  Such  studies  tend  more 
to  confound  than  to  inform  the  understanding,  and 
young  people  had  better  let  them  alone.  But 
since  I  find  you  have  some  scruples  concerning 
our  article  '  Of  Predestination,'  I  will  tell  you  my 
thoughts  of  the  matter.  .  .  .  The  doctrine  of 
predestination  as  maintained  by  the  rigid  Calvin- 
ists  is  very  shocking,  and  ought  to  be  abhorred, 
because  it  directly  charges  the  Most  High  God  with 
being  the  author  of  sin.  I  think  you  reason  well 
and  justly  against  it;  for  it  is  certainly  inconsistent 
with  the  justice  and  goodness  of  God  to  lay  any 
man  under  either  a  physical  or  moral  necessity  of 
committing  sin,  and  then  to  punish  him  for  doing- 
it."     (Tyerman,  Vol.  I,  j).  40.) 


WESLEYAN  ARMJNIANISM.  161 

There  were  prejudices  for  him  to  overcome, 
questions  arising  from  early  education  to  be  care- 
fully and  justly  answered,  and  a  new  life  to  be  felt 
in  his  own  heart  before  he  could  be  said  to  be  dis- 
euthralled  and  breathe  the  spirit  of  a  really  free 
man.  But  God,  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  was  leading  him 
on  step  by  step,  over  a  rough  road  to  the  place  of 
certainty  and  satisfaction. 

In  1740,  Mr.  Wesley  delivered  a  sermon  on 
"  Free  Grace,"  using  for  a  text,  Romans  viii,  32, 
which  was  printed,  having  annexed  Charles  Wes- 
ley's "Hymn  on  Universal  Redemption."  In  this 
sermon  he  sharply  defines  predestination  as  the 
Calvinists  insisted  on  defining  it.  "Free  grace  in 
all,"  he  said,  "is  not  free  grace  for  all,  but  only 
for  those  whom  God  hath  ordained  to  life.  The 
greater  part  of  mankind  God  hath  ordained  to 
death,  and  it  is  not  free  for  them.  Them  God 
hateth,  and  therefore,  before  they  were  born,  de- 
creed that  they  should  die  eternally.  And  this  he 
absolutely  decreed,  because  it  was  his  sovereign 
will.  Accordingly  they  are  born  for  this,  to  be  de- 
stroyed body  and  soul  in  hell.  And  they  grow  up 
under  the  irrevocable  curse  of  God,  without  any 
possibility  of  redemption  ;  for  what  grace  God  gives, 
he  gives  only  for  this,  to  increase,  not  prevent  their 
damnation." 

Mr.  Wesley  then  states  his  reasons  for  antag- 
onizing the  doctrine  of  predestination  : 

"1.  It  renders  all  preaching  vain ;  for  preach- 


162  AR  MINI  A  NISM  IX  HISTO  R  Y. 

iug  is  needless  to  them  that  are  elected  ;  for  they, 
whether  with  it  or  without  it,  will  infallibly  be 
saved.  And  it  is  useless  to  them  that  are  not 
elected  ;  for  they,  whether  with  preaching  or  with- 
out it,  will  infollibly  be  damned. 

"2.  It  directly  tends  to  destroy  that  holiness 
which  is  the  end  of  all  the  ordinances  of  God;  for 
it  wholly  takes  away  those  first  motives  to  follow 
after  holiness,  so  frequently  proposed  in  Scripture, 
the  hope  of  future  reward  and  fear  of  punishment, 
the  hope  of  heaven  and  fear  of  hell. 

"3.  It  directly  tends  to  destroy  several  partic- 
ular branches  of  holiness  ;  for  it  naturally  tends  to 
inspire  or  increase  a  sharpness  of  temper,  which  is 
quite  contrary  to  the  meekness  of  Christ,  and  leads 
a  man  to  treat  with  contempt  or  coldness  those  w^hora 
he  supposes  to  be  outcasts  from  God. 

"4.   It  tends  to  destroy  the  comfort  of  religion. 

"5.  It  directly  tends  to  destroy  our  zeal  for 
good  works ;  for  what  avails  it  to  relieve  the  wants 
of  those  who  are  just  dropping  into  eternal  fire? 

"6.  It  is  a  direct  and  manifest  tendency  to 
overthrow  the  whole  Christian  ]-evelation ;  for  it 
makes  it  unnecessary. 

"  7.  It  makes  the  Christian  revelation  contra- 
dict itself;  for  it  is  grounded  on  such  an  interpre- 
tation of  some  texts  as  flatly  contradicts  all  the 
other  texts,  and  indeed  the  Avhole  scoj)o  and  tenor 
of  Scripture. 

"8.  It  is   full  of  blasphemy;  for  it  represents 


WESLEVAN  ARMINIANIS3I.  163 

our  blessed  Lord  as  a  hypocrite  and  dissembler,  in 
saying  one  thing  and  meaning  another,  in  pretend- 
ing a  love  which  he  had  not ;  it  also  represents  the 
most  holy  God  as  more  false,  more  cruel,  and  more 
unjust  than  the  devil;  for,  in  point  of  fact,  it  says 
that  God  has  condemned  millions  of  souls  to  ever- 
lasting fire  for  continuing  in  sin,  which,  for  want  of 
the  grace  he  gives  them  not,  they  are  unable  to 
avoid."     (Tyerman,  Vol.  I,  p.  319.) 

From  this  time  on  Mr.  Wesley  does  not  seem  to 
have  any  trouble  or  question  as  to  the  nature  and 
character  of  Calvinism.  He  preached  against  it. 
He  warned  his  followers  against  its  seductive  wiles, 
and  led  many  out  of  the  slough  of  despond  to  per- 
fect rest  and  peace.  His  utterances  grew  strong 
against  predestination.  In  1741  he  published  "A 
Dialogue  between  a  Predestiuarian  and  his  Friend," 
in  which  he  showed,  "from  the  writings  of  Pisca- 
tor,  Calvin,  Zauchius,  and  others,  that  predestina- 
rianism  teaches  that  God  causes  reprobates  to  sin, 
and  creates  them  on  purpose  to  be  damned."  (Tyer- 
man, Vol.  I,  p.  3()6.) 

ti  1741,  Mr.  Wesley  published  two  small  works 
on  predestination — "The  Scripture  Doctrine  Con- 
cerning Predestination,  Ellection,  and  Reprobation," 
and  "Serious  Considerations  on  Absolute  Predesti- 
nation." In  this  last  he  gave  four  reasons  why 
he  objected  to  the  doctrine  of  absolute  predesti- 
nation : 

"  1.   Because  it  makes  God  the  author  of  sin. 


1 64  A  R  MINI  A  NIS3I  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

"  2.  Because  it  niakcs  Hiiu  deligit  in  tlie  death 
of  sinners. 

"  3.  Because  it  is  highly  injurious  to  Christ,  our 
Mediator. 

"  4.  Because  it  makes  the  preaching  of  the  gos- 
pel a  mere  mockery  and  illusion." 

John  Wesley  Avas  now  out  in  the  clear  light  of 
God's  love  to  all  sinners,  and  fully  appreciated  the 
mission  of  Christ  to  fulfill  the  will  of  the  Father 
with  regard  to  providing  a  plan  whereby  all  men 
may  be  })laced  in  a  salvable  state,  and  by  the  exer- 
cise of  the  will  may,  "  by  repentance  towards  God 
and  faith  towards  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  be 
brought  into  a  personal  relation  with  .God  as  actu- 
ally pardoned  and  accepted,  and  receive  the  assur- 
ance that  God  is  reconciled.  These  words,  as  ex- 
pressive of  the  greatest  doctrines  of  a  pure  and 
true  religion,  were  often  presented  and  elucidated 
by  Mr.  Wesley,  namely :  Justification  by  faith 
only,  repentance,  free  will,  Divine  grace,  pardon, 
assurance,  reconciled,  salvation  free  for  all.  From 
this  time  forward  it  was  a  source  of  unbounded  de- 
light to  preach  to  sinners,  high  or  low,  a  free  and 
and  full  salvation  from  all  sin,  and  declare  that 
in  the  "freedom  of  the  will"  lies  man's  dignity 
and  manhood.  To  all  classes,  high  and  cultured, 
low  and  ignorant,  the  respectable  sinners  and  the 
vilest  outcasts,  he  preached  a  Christ  for  them. 
AVhile  in  a  state  of  probation  they  were  permitted 
to    come    to    Christ,  and    enter    the    fold    and    be 


WESLEVAS  ARMINIANtSM.  165 

saved.  Thousands  of  sinners,  hearing  this  great 
doctrine  of  Christ  as  preached  by  \Yesley  and  his 
preachers,  which  was  true  Arminianisiu,  bowed  be- 
fore the  Savior  in  repentance,  and  by  faith  received 
him  into  the  heart,  and  arose  new  creatures.  The 
preaching  of  Christ  after  the  Arniinian  doctrine 
brought  to  England  the  greatest  and  most  thorough 
revival  it  ever  knew. 

The  Arminian  Magazine. 

Mr.  Wesley,  after  long  and  critical  study  and 
the  constant  preaching  of  Armiuiauism,  determined 
to  establish  a  magazine  which  should  regularly 
appear  as  an  auxiliary  to  him  in  fulfilling  his 
mission  to  men.  To  this  magazine  he  gave  the 
name  of  "  Arminian,"  in  honor  of  that  great  divine 
of  Holland,  James  Arminius.  According  to  Tyer- 
man's  life.  Vol.  Ill,  August  14,  1777,  Mr.  Wesley 
drew  up  his  proposal  "  for  a  magazine  to  be  issued 
for  the  benefit  of  the  Methodists."  The  heading  is 
unique;  namely,  "The  Arminian  Magazine:  Con- 
sisting of  Extracts  and  Original  Treatises  on  Uni- 
versal Redemption." 

In  the  first  and  second  paragraphs  he  sets  forth 
what  had  been  published  in  the  Christian  Macja- 
zine,  in  the  Spintual  Magazine,  and  the  Gospel 
Magazine,  that  Christ  did  not  die  for  all,  but  for 
one  in  ten,  for  the  elect  only.  He  then  says :  "  This 
comfortable  doctrine,  the  sum  of  which,  proposed 
in  plain  English,  is,  God  before  the  foundation  of 


166  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

the  world  a])solutely  and  irrevocal)ly  decreed  that 
*  some  men  shall  be  saved,  do  what  they  will,  and  the 
rest  be  damned,  do  what  they  can,'  has  by  these 
tracts  been  distributed  throughout  the  land  with  the 
utmost  diligence.  And  these  champions  of  it  have, 
from  the  beginning,  proceeded  in  a  manner  worthy 
of  their  cause.  They  have  paid  no  more  regard  to 
good  nature,  decency,  or  good  manners,  than  to 
reason  or  truth.  All  these  they  set  utterly  at 
defiance.  AVithout  any  deviations  from  their  plan, 
they  have  defended  their  dear  decrees  with  argu- 
ments worthy  of  Bedlam,  and  with  language  worthy 
of  Billingsgate." 

In  his  third  paragraph  he  gives  the  character  of 
his  proposed  magazine.  "In  the  Anninian  Maga- 
zine a  very  different  opinion  will  be  defended  in  a 
very  different  manner.  We  maintain  that  God 
willeth  all  men  to  be  saved,  by  speaking  the  truth 
in  love,  by  arguments  and  illustrations  drawn 
partly  from  the  Scripture,  partly  from  reason ;  pro- 
posed in  as  inoffensive  a  manner  as  the  nature  of 
the  thing  will  permit.  Not  that  we  expect  those  on 
the  other  side  of  the  question  will  use  us  as  we  use 
them.  Yet  we  hope  nothing  will  move  us  to  re- 
turn evil  for  evil,  or,  however  provoked,  to  render 
railing  for  railing." 

In  paragraph  5  he  tells  us  what  shall  be  the 
first  article  in  the  magazine.  "  We  know  nothing 
more  proper  to  introduce  a  work  of  this  kind  than 
a  sketch  of  the  life  and  death  of  Arminius,  a  per- 


WESLEYAN  ARMINIANIS3I.  167 

sou  with  whom  those  who  mention  his  name  with 
the  utmost  indignity  are  commonly  quite  unac- 
quainted, of  whom  they  know  no  more  than 
Hermes  Trismegistus."  (Tyerman's  Life  of  AVes- 
ley,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  281,  282.) 

Separation  Between  John  Wesley  and 
George  Whitefield, 

What  was  the  cause  of  the  separation  between 
these  two  great  lights  in  Methodism,  John  Wesley 
and  George  Whitefield  ?  When  did  it  occur  ?  These 
two  master  minds  were  members  of  the  Holy  Club 
at  Oxford,  often  met  as  the  years  went  by,  seemed 
to  maintain  the  warmest  attachment  for  years, 
preached  in  the  same  open  fields  and  to  the  same 
crowds,  rejoiced  together  in  the  conversion  of  the 
same  souls,  but  after  a  time  separated  and  walked 
different  paths,  and  sought  to  build  up  different  de- 
nominations. In  1739,  w^hen  at  London,  the  prop- 
erty designed  for  the  use  of  the  society  of  Meth- 
odists was  purchased,  it  was  deeded  to  trustees. 
Debts  occurred  by  the  misiuauagement  of  the  trus- 
tees, and  the  burden  fell  on  Mr.  Wesley.  Mr. 
Whitefield  refused  to  aid  in  the  liqudation  of  the 
debt  so  long  as  the  title  Avas  in  trustees ;  but  if  Mr. 
Wesley  held  the  title,  he  and  others  would  seek  to 
obtain  the  funds  to  pay  the  debt  and  complete  the 
chapel.  Mr.  Whitefield  said  if  the  deed  remains 
in  the  trustees,  unless  Mr.  Wesley  preaches  to  suit 
them    they  may  at  any  moment,  and   for  any  pre- 


1  fi  8  A  R  MINI  A  NISM  IN  HIS  TOR  Y. 

tense,  shut  up  the  buildiiiij  and  bar  out  Mr.  AVes- 
ley.  After  a  full  and  free  discussion  of  the  sub- 
ject the  trustees  conveyed  the  title  to  Mr,  Wesley, 
who  held  it  until,  by  his  famous  "  Deed  of  Declara- 
tion," he  conveyed  all  his  interests  in  the  church 
property  to  the  Legal  Hundred,  who  constitute  the 
"  JNTethodist  Wesleyan  Conference." 

At  this  time  there  was  the  most  perfect  harmony 
existing  between  Wesley  and  Whitefield.  They 
had  lal)ored  together  in  the  founding  of  the  Kiugs- 
wood  (School.  They  had  collected  and  given  money 
to  carry  it  forward.  Together  they  had  labored  for 
the  salvation  of  the  wicked  Kingswood  colliers,  and 
to  all  appearances  their  hearts  were  -knit  together 
like  those  of  David  and  Jonathan. 

Thei-e  were  already  marked  differences  between 
these  two  men.  Mr.  Wesley  was  the  logician  and 
great  organizer.  His  gigantic  mind  and  warm 
heart  reached  out  to  all  men,  and  discovered  forces 
latent,  but  ready  to  be  brought  into  active  exercise. 
He  readily  discovered  how  men  might  be  organized 
to  accomplish  the  will  of  God.  He  was  a  foir  oi'a- 
tor,  but  always  a  clear,  sound  thinker.  Mr.  AVhite- 
field  was  an  impulsive  man,  a  splendid  orator,  as 
full  of  passion  and  feeling  as  a  human  heart  could 
be.  He  had  a  splendid  voice,  and  could  speak  to 
thousands  as  well  as  to  hundreds.  His  oratory 
was  the  greatest  of  the  world.  He  played  with  hu- 
man emotions  as  readily  as  a  child  will  play  with 
its  mother's  apron-strings.     He  was  neither  a  logi- 


WESLEYAN  AR^IINIANISil.  169 

cian  nor  organizer.  He  possessed  a  vivid  imagina- 
tion, and  could  plan  for  the  millions,  but  he  could 
not  execute. 

"Up  to  the  time  of  A¥hitefield's  visit  to  Amei'- 
ica,"  says  Tyerman,  "he  and  the  Wesleys  had  la- 
bored in  union  and  harmony  without  entering  into 
the  discussion  of  particular  opinions ;  but  now, 
across  the  Atlantic,  Whitefield  became  acquainted 
with  a  number  of  godly  Calvinist  ministers,  who  rec- 
ommended to  him  the  writings  of  the  Puritan  di- 
vines, which  he  read  with  great  avidity,  and,  as 
a  consequence,  soon  embraced  their  sentiments." 
(Tyerman,  Vol.  I,  p.  312.) 

Mr.  Whitefield  was  of  such  a  disposition  that 
he  must  communicate  to  Mr.  Wesley  the  change 
that  had  occurred  in  his  mind.  His  letter  of  July 
2,  1739,  from  Gloucester  to  Mr.  Wesley,  has  a 
plaint  of  sorrow  because  Mr.  Wesley  does  not  hold 
and  advocate  predestination.  "Dear,  honored  Sir," 
writes  Whitefield,  "if  you  have  any  regard  for  the 
peace  of  the  Church,  keep  in  your  sermon  on  Pre- 
destination. •  But  you  have  cast  a  lot."  With  this 
letter  Whitefield  evidenced  how  fully  his  heart  was 
set  on  rescuing  Mr.  Wesley  from  the  error  of  Ar- 
miuinism,  as  he  thought  it  to  be.  "  O,  my  heart," 
writes  he,  "in  the  midst  of  my  body,  is  like  melted 
wax." 

To  this  Mr.  Wesley  wrote,  firmly  opposing  the 
doctrine  of  election,  and  setting  forth  the  privilege 
of  Christians   to    know  that   they  are    saved    "  en- 


170  ARMINIANISM  IS  HISTOR  Y. 

tirely  from  sin    in  its  proper  sense,  and  from  com- 
mitting it." 

Mr.  Whitefield  soon  went  to  America  the  second 
time.  He  carried  liis  ardent  desire  for  the  integ- 
rity of  Calvinism  with  him,  and  advocated  it  al- 
most continuously.  Whitefield  addressed  a  letter 
to  Wesley  from  Savannah,  Ga.,  March  26,  1740. 
Injt  he  said:  "For  once  hearken  to  a  child,  who 
is  willing  to  wash  your  feet.  ...  If  possible, 
I  am  ten  thousand  times  more  convinced  of  the  doc- 
trine of  election  and  the  final  perseverance  of  those 
that  are  truly  in  Christ,  than  when  I  saw  you  last. 
You  think  otherwise.  Why,  then,  should  we  dis- 
pute, when  there  is  no  probability  of  convincing  ?" 
Whitefield  knew  enough  of  Mr.  Wesley  and  his 
firmness  when  convinced  of  the  right  to  know  how 
improbable  it  was  that  he  would  be  able  to  con- 
vince Mr.  Wesley,  and  change  his  belief.  But, 
May  24,  1740,  Mr.  Whitefield  wrote  again  to  INFr. 
Wesley,  dating  his  letter  from  Cape  Lopen  :  "  Hon- 
ored Sir,"  he  wrote,  "I  can  not  entertain  prejudices 
against  your  conduct  and  principles  any  longer 
without  imploring  you.  The  more  I  examine  the 
writings  of  the  most  experienced  men,  and  the  ex- 
perience of  the  most  established  Christians,  the 
more  I  differ  from  your  notion  about  not  commit- 
ting sin,  and  your  denying  the  doctrines  of  election 
and  final  perseverance  of  the  saints.  I  dread  com- 
ing to  England,  unless  you  are  resolved  to  oppose 
these  truths  with  less  warmth  than  when  I  was  there 


WESLEYAN  AR3IINIANISM.  171 

last.  .  .  .  God  himself  teaches,  my  friend, 
the  doctriue  of  election.  .  .  .  Perhaps  I  may 
never  see  you  again  till  we  meet  in  judgment ; 
then,  if  not  hefore,  you  will  know  that  sovereign, 
distinguishing,  irresistible  grace  brought  you  to 
heaven.  Then  will  you  know  that  God  loved  you 
with  au  everlasting  love."  (Tyerman,  Vol.  I, 
P-314.) 

Whitefield  revealed  an  historic  fact  in  his  letters 
to  Wesley,  that  in  America  at  that  time  there  was 
only  known  and  preached  the  hardest  and  harsh- 
est kind  of  Calvinism.  The  preaching  of  Cotton 
Mather,  Increase  Mather,  the  Edwardses,  and  others, 
had  saturated  the  American  mind  with  Calvinism 
the  entire  length  of  the  Atlantic  coast,  and  settled 
the  people  into  the  habit  of  an  unrighteous  intol- 
erance. 

Not  content  with  sending  epistles  to  Mr.  AVes- 
ley,  Whitefield  wrote  to  others  to  prejudice  them 
against  his  former  warm  friend  and  well-wisher.  To 
Mr.  James  Hutton  he  writes:  "For  Christ's  sake, 
desire  dear  Brother  Wesley  to  avoid  disputing  with 
me.  I  think  I  had  rather  die  than  see  a  division 
between  us ;  and  yet  how  can  we  walk  together  if 
we  oppose  each  other?"  (Tyerman,  Vol.  I,  p.  315.) 
On  the  25th  of  June,  1740,  Whitefield  wrote  from 
Savannah,  Georgia,  to  Wesley,  using  this  language  : 
"For  Christ's  sake,  if  possible,  never  speak  against 
election  in  your  sermons."  In  all  of  Mr.  White- 
field's  letters  there  was  not  oflfered  a  single  argument 


172  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

to  substautiate  the  ductriue  of  election  or  repj:oba- 
tiou.  His  were  mere  assertions,  and  declarations  of 
sorrow  that  ]Mr.  Wesley  did  not  believe  as  he.  But, 
so  far  as  can  be  discovered,  this  noble  English  Ar- 
minian  did  not  reply  until  August  9,  1740,  when 
he  wrote  to  Mr.  Whitefield  :  "  My  Dear  Brother, — 
I  thank  you  for  yours  of  May  24th.  The  case  is 
quite  plain.  There  are  bigots  both  for  predestina- 
tion and  against  it.  God  is  sending  a  message  to 
these  on  either  side.  But  neither  will  I'eceive  it. 
unless  from  one  who  is  of  their  own  opinion.  Thei'e- 
fore,  for  a  time,  you  are  suffered  to  be  of  one  opin- 
ion, and  I  of  another.  But  when  His  time  is  come, 
'  God  will  do  what  man  can  not ;  namely,  make  us 
of  one  mind.  Then  persecution  will  flame  out,  and 
it  will  be  seen  whether  we  count  our  lives  dear  unto 
ourselves,  so  that  we  may  finish  our  course  with 
joy."     (Tyerman,  Vol.  I,  p.  316.) 

Two  letters  came  to  Mi-.  Wesley,  one  from 
Charlestown,  8outh  Carolina,  August  25,  1740,  in 
which  Mr.  Whitefield  modified  somewhat  his  ardor 
against  Mr.  Wesley,  and  admits  that  ' '  perhaps 
the  doctrines  of  election  and  of  final  perseverance 
have  been  abused ;  but,  notwithstanding,  they  are 
children's  bread,  and  ought  not  to  be  withheld  from 
them,  supposing  they  are  always  mentioned  with 
proper  cautions  against  the  abuse  of  them."  (Tyer- 
man, Vol.  I,  p.  316.) 

The  second  letter  was  dated  Boston,  September 
25,  1740.      After  criticising  Mr.  Wesley  as  to  "sin- 


WESLE YAN  A  RMINIA NISM.  173 

less  perfection,"  concerning  which  Mr.  Whitefield 
had  distorted  notions,  he  says:  "Besides,  dear  Sir, 
what  a  fond  conceit  it  is  to  cry  up  perfection,  and 
to  cry  down  the  doctrine  of  final  perseverance  !  But 
this  and  many  oth^r  absurdities  you  will  run  into, 
because  you  will  not  own  election,  because  you  can 
not  own  it  without  believing  the  doctrine  of  repro- 
bation. What,  then,  is  there  in  reprobation  so  hor- 
rid ?  I  see  no  blasphemy  in  holding  that  doctrine, 
if  rightly  explained.  If  God  might  have  passed  by 
all,  he  may  pass  by  some.  Judge  whether  it  is  not 
a  greater  blasphemy  to  say,  '  Christ  died  for  souls 
now  in  hell.'  "     (Tyerman,  Vol.  I,  p.  317.) 

The  Calvinistic  controversy  grew  with  the  years, 
and  caused  many  heart-burnings.  In  Wales  the 
work  of  the  Methodist  societies  went  on  under  the 
direction  of  Rev.  Howell  Harris,  a  man  of  great 
power  and  unusual  spirituality.  When  the  contro- 
versy came  on,  he  took  the  side  of  Calvinism,  and 
opposed  Mr.  Wesley  and  his  Arminian  views.  His 
letters  to  Mr.  Wesley  were  of  a  very  severe  charac- 
ter, and,  when  read  in  the  light  of  history,  evince  a 
mistaken  man.  In  his  letter  of  July  16,  1740,  to 
Mr.  Wesley,  he  says:  "I  hope  I  shall  contend,  with 
my  last  breath  and  blood,  that  it  is  owing  to  special, 
distinguishing,  and  irresistible  grace  that  those  that 
are  saved,  are  saved.  O  that  you  would  not  touch 
on  this  subject  till  God  enlighten  you  !  My  dear 
brother,  being  a  public  person,  you  grieve  God's 
people  by  your  opposition  to  electing  love ;  and 
12 


174  ARMIXIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

many  poor  souls  believe  your  doctrine  simply  be- 
cause you  hold  it.  All  this  arises  from  the  preju- 
dices of  your  education,  your  books,  your  compan- 
ions, and  the  remains  of  your  carnal  reason.  The 
more  I  write,  the  more  I  love  you.  I  am  sure  you 
are  one  of  God's  elect,  and  that  you  act  honestly 
according  to  the  light  you  have."  (Tyerman,  Vol. 
I,  p.  315.) 

Mr.  Wesley  desired  to  retain  INIr.  Harris,  but 
his  course  was  such  as  to  i-ender  this  irai^ossible. 
January  5  and  6,  1748,  he  gathered  the  societies 
of  Wales  into  a  sort  of  compact  on  the  Calvinistic 
basis,  Whitefield  and  other  clergymen  being  present, 
and  after  the  death  of  Countess  Huntingdon,  in 
1791,  they  became  the  Welsh  Calvinistic  Meth- 
odists. 

The  Countess  of  Huntingdon  was  a  very  relig- 
ious woman,  who  admired  the  earnest  preaching  of 
Mr.  Wesley  and  Mr.  Whitefield.  INIr.  Wesley  was 
of  too  independent  a  turn  of  mind  to  be  led  by  her, 
but  Mr.  Whitefield  was  taken  "  under  her  special 
patronage."  When,  on  his  return  from  America,  he 
began  to  preach  Calvinism,  she  embraced  that  doc- 
trine with  all  her  heart.  In  some  manner  she  con- 
ceived that  Wesley  denied  "justification  by  faith, 
and  insisted  upon  the  saving  merit  of  works,"  a  con- 
clusion which  she  arrived  at  without  the  slightest 
shadow  of  a  foundation.  Mr.  Wesley  was  called 
upon  to  recant,  Avhen  he  had  nothing  to  recant. 
Now,  Mr.  Shirley,  a  relative  of  the  countess,  and 


WESLEYAN  ARMINIANISM.  VI b 

Mr.  Toplady,  antagonized  Wesley,  being  leading 
defenders  of  Calvinism.  The  controversy  ran  high. 
The  countess  and  Mr.  Wesley  parted,  never  to  meet 
again  on  earth.  It  was  long  years  of  feeling  against 
Mr.  Wesley  that  Lady  Huntingdon  lived  before  her 
mind  was  disabused  of  its  error  regarding  him,  and 
she  came  to  look  upon  him  as  a  man  of  God. 

Mr.  Whitefield  possessed  no  organizing  power, 
and  so  did  not  organize  a  Church  or  found  a 
sect.  The  Countess,  a  woman  of  more  than  ordi- 
nary ability,  undertook  the  work,  and  succeeded  in 
founding  a  sect,  which  might  have  been  known  as 
Whitefieldian  Methodists,  but  were  called  "The 
Countess  of  Huntingdon's  Connection."  At  her 
own  house,  preaching  and  religious  services  were 
often  held,  and  people  of  the  upper  classes  attended, 
and  many  were  spiritually  benefited.  She  built 
many  chapels  in  London  and  other  parts  of  Eng- 
land, and  even  in  Scotland.  The  college  founded 
at  Trevecca,  in  Wales,  and  afterwards  moved  to 
Cheshunt,  Herts,  was  for  the  education  of  ministers, 
and  accomplished  good.  She  became  the  sole  ex- 
ecutrix of  the  will  of  George  Whitefield,  on  his 
death  in  1777. 

After  the  death  of  Mr.  Whitefield,  the  Calvin- 
istic  Methodists  separated  into  three  sects.  1. 
The  Lady  Huntingdon  Connection,  which  "ob- 
served strictly  the  liturgical  forms  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church,  with  a  settled  pastorate."  2.  The 
Tabernacle    Connection,  or    Whitefield  Methodists 


170  A RMINIANISM  IN  HISTOR 7. 

who,  having  no  bond  of  connection  after  his  death, 
drifted  into  Congregationalism  and  Independency. 
3.  The  Welsh  Calvinistic  Methodists,  who  continue 
quite  thrifty  unto  the  present,  but  because  of  their 
strong  Calvinistic  belief  affiliate  more  with  the 
Presbyterians  than  with  the  Methodists. 

Coming  back  to  the  i-elations  between  Mr.  Wes- 
ley and  Mr.  Whitefield,  we  will  find  that,  after  the 
first  severe  outburst  of  feeling  and  antagonism  to- 
wards Mr.  Wesley  because  he  would  not  favor  the 
doctrine  of  predestination,  Mr.  Whitefield  began  to 
modify  his  spirit,  and  write  as  though  he  desired 
union.  In  1744,  Mr.  Whitefield  went  to  America, 
where  he  remained  until  1748. 

In  October,  1746,  Whitefield  wrote  to  Wesley 
a  letter  which  evinced  the  dawning  of  a  desire  to 
bury  their  theological  differences.  "The  regard  I 
have  always  had  for  you  and  your  brother,"  wrote 
Whitefield,  "  is  still  as  great  as  ever,  and  I  trust  we 
shall  give  this  and  future  ages  an  example  of  true 
Christian  love  abiding,  notwithstanding  differences 
in  judgment.  Why  our  Lord  has  permitted  us  to 
differ  as  to  some  points  of  doctrine  will  be  dis- 
covered on  the  last  day." 

During  the  year  1747,  Mr.  Wesley  wrote  to 
Whitefield  regarding  a  union  of  the  societies  of 
Methodism.  To  this  ]Mr.  Whitefield  replied,  Sep- 
tember 11,  1747  :  "My  heart  is  ready  for  an  out- 
ward as  well  as  an  inward  union.  Nothing  shall  be 
wanting  on  my  part  to  bring  it  about ;  but  I  can  not 


WESLE YAN  A RMINIA NISM.  Ill 

see  how  it  can  possibly  be  effected  till  we  all  speak 
and  tbiuk  the  same  things.  ...  As  for  universal  re- 
demption, if  we  omit  on  each  side  the  talking  for  or 
against  reprobation,  as  we  may  fairly  do,  and  agree, 
as  we  already  do,  in  giving  an  universal  offer  to  all 
poor  sinners  that  will  come  and  taste  of  the  water 
of  life,  I  think  we  may  manage  very  well." 

In  1748,  after  four  years'  residence  in  Amer- 
ica, Whitefield  landed  again  in  England.  He 
found  many  changes,  and  some  of  them  greatly  to 
his  disadvantage.  September  1st  he  wrote  to  Wes- 
ley from  London  regarding  the  union:  "What 
have  you  thought  about  a  union?  I  am  afraid  an 
external  one  is  impracticable.  I  find,  by  your  ser- 
mons, that  we  differ  in  principles  more  than  I 
thought,  and  I  believe  we  are  upon  two  different 
plans."  Whitefield  found,  on  visiting  Scotland,  that 
he  was  not  so  great  a  favorite  as  in  earlier  times. 
On  reaching  Edinburgh,  he  found  his  old  friends,  the 
Seceders,  "met  to  adopt  the  new-modeled  scheme 
and  covenant."  "Hundreds  took  the  oath,  and 
solemnly  engaged  to  use  all  lawful  means  to  extir- 
pate, not  only  popery,  prelacy,  Arminianism,  Arian- 
ism,  Tritheism  and  Sabellianism,"  but  also  "George 
W^hitefieldism ;"  and  "  similar  decisions  were  adopted 
at  the  Synods  of  Lothian,  Ayr,  and  Glasgow." 
(Tyerman,  Vol.  H,  p.  23.) 

Since  Whitefield  determined  to  be  an  evangelist 
in  general,  and  not  establish  societies,  and  Mr.  Wes- 
ley was  at  work  founding  societies  from  one  end  of 


1 7  8  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

England  to  the  other,  as  well  as  evangelizing  the 
whole  country,  there  was  little  need  for  the  opin- 
ions of  these  men  to  come  in  conflict.  Hence  we 
find  there  was  a  union  of  heart,  even  when  there 
was  no  union  of  societies. 

From  this  time  forward,  in  the  hearts  of  these 
noble  men  of  God,  only  love  and  true  fellowship 
abode.  They  had  little  or  nothing  to  say  to  each 
other  of  their  doctrinal  differences.  They  lived  as 
devout  Christians,  striving  after  the  mastery  as  sous 
of  God. 


Chapter  IX. 

SCHOLARS  OF  ARMINIANISM. 

Scholars  of  English  and  American  Anuinianism — Misunder- 
standing of  the  Arniinian  Controversy  by  many  Ger- 
man Authors — Kurtz  and  his  Church  History — Armin- 
ianism  never  advocated  Latitudinarianism — Arminian- 
ism  has  had  Worthy  Scholars — Arminian  Systematic 
Theology — Fletcher — Benson's  Description  of  Fletcher — 
Fletcher  and  the  Quinquarticular  Controversy — State- 
ment of  Arminianisni — Answer  to  Toplady — God's  Per- 
fections honored  in  Arminianisni — Closing  Statements 
of  the  Equal  Check — Essays  on  Bible  Calvinism  and 
Bible  Arminianisni — Samjile  of  Fletcher's  Style — Rich- 
ard Watson — Theological  Institutes  —  Wm.  B.  Pope — 
His  Christian  Theology  —  Dr.  Adam  Clarke — Clarke's 
Commentaries — Miner  Raymond — D.  D.  Whedon — Free- 
dom of  the  Will — Wilbur  Fisk — Calvinistic  Contro- 
versy— The  Metaphysical  Theory  of  Dr.  Hopkins — New 
England  Calvinism  startled  by  "  Calvinism  Improved  " — 
New  Divinity  of  New  England — Four  Conclusions. 

One  of  the  most  astonishing  things  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  Arminian  controversy  is  the  appar- 
ent misunderstanding  by  some  modern  German,  as 
well  as  other  writers,  of  what  Arminianism  was  as 
taught  by  Arminius,  Episcopius,  Grotius,  and  Lim- 
borch.  Such  a  writer  as  Kurtz,  in  his  Church  His- 
tory, talks  about  the  doctrine  of  Arminius  finding 
"expression  in  latitudinarianism,  and,  still  worse, 
in  Deism."  He  links  Arminian  docti'ine  to  the  Deism 
of  Edward,  Lord  Herbert,  of  Cherbury,  who  "  re- 

179 


180  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIS  TORY. 

duced  religiou  to  five  points :  Belief  in  God ;  ob- 
ligation to  honor  him  ;  an  upright  life ;  expiation 
of  sin  by  sincere  repentance  ;  retribution  in  eternal 
life;"  and  to  Thomas  Hobbes,  who  "regarded, 
Christianity  as  an  Oriental  phantom,  only  of  impor- 
tance as  a  sujiport  of  absolute  royalty,  and  as  an 
antidote  against  revolution."  (See  Kurtz,  Church 
History,  Vol.  II,  section  40,  and  section  42.)  He 
also  charges  that  James  Arminius  "became  more 
and  more  convinced  that  the  dogma  of  an  absolute 
predestination  Avas  antiscriptural,  but  wandered 
into  Pelagian  paths."  He  also  claims  that  the  Five 
Articles  presented  by  the  Remonstrants  to  the 
States  in  1610,  "set  forth  a  carefully-restricted 
semi-Pelagianism."  (Kurtz,  Vol.  II,  section  40.) 
At  no  time  or  place  was  Arminianism  connected 
with,  under  the  control  of,  or  advocated  by  latitudi- 
narians  or  Deists.  These  were  not  necessarily  the 
outgrowth  of  Arminianism,  but  were  evolved  from 
the  direct  revolt  of  the  human  heart  from  the  com- 
mands of  God  to  a  righteous  and  holy  life,  and  the 
pardon  of  sin  for  the  merit  of  the  atonement  in 
Jesus  Christ.  It  is  a  thing  beyond  comprehension 
how  so  discerning  minds  in  most  matters  can  be  so 
utterly  misled  when  they  attempt  to  speak  of  Ar- 
minianism, and  declare  the  connection  between  its 
doctrines  and  those  so  marked  in  their  opposition 
to  the  essential  principles  set  forth  by  Arminius, 
Episcopius,  Grotius,  Limborch,  and  many  other  em- 
inent and  scholai'ly  men. 


SCHOLA  RS  OF  ARMINIA  NISM.  181 

Arminianism  has  bad  worthy  scholars  and 
writers,  who  have  thought  over  and  through  the 
great  problems  of  Arminianism,  and  have  con- 
structed admirable  and  complete  works  in  Armin- 
ian  systematic  theology.  They  have  grappled 
the  subject  in  all  its  phases,  have  seen  how  and 
when  it  was  possible  to  construct  a  system  of  the- 
ology that  should  reasonably  and  fully  explain 
the  mystery  of  texts  of  Scripture  that  were  in 
controversy,  remove  from  many  minds  the  doubt 
and  gloom  that  resulted  from  considering  the  pas- 
sages so  prominently  urged  by  the  Calvinists,  and 
have  encouraged  believing  souls  to  look  out  upon 
a  bright  and  glorious  futui-e  life,  which  they  may 
know  as  a  certainty  to-day.  There  are  commenta- 
tors of  Armiuian  faith  who  have  patiently  and 
faithfully  gone  over  the  entire  Word  of  God,  and 
found  reasonable  and  logical  explanation  of  the 
Book  of  God.  They  have  brought  great  comfort 
to  human  hearts  by  flooding  light  upon  dark 
places.  It  is  our  purpose  now  to  inquire  as  to 
some  of  these  men  and  their  works. 

Rev.  John  William  Fletcher,  the  Vicar  of 
Madeley,  was  born  at  Nyon,  Vaud,  Switzerland, 
September  12,  1729.  His  family  was  very  much  dis- 
tinguished. He  was  highly  educated,  being  "mas- 
ter of  the  French,  German,  Latin,  Hebrew,  and 
Greek  languages,  which  he  had  learned  in  France;" 
but  "his  theological  and  philosophical  education 
was  acquired  at  Geneva,"  even  amid   the  teachings 


182  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIS  TORY. 

of  Calviuism.  While  his  parents  desired  him  to 
enter  the  ministry,  he  was  determined  to  be  a  sol- 
dier, and  gain  distinction  on  the  field  of  blood. 
He  entered  the  army  of  Portugal  as  a  captain. 
Soon  afterwards  peace  was  made  with  England, 
and  his  occupation  as  a  soldier  suddenly  ended. 
He  next  went  to  England  as  a  tutor.  Here  he 
came  in  contact  with  the  rising  Methodist  societies, 
and  in  1755  united  with  them.  In  1757  he  was 
ordained,  in  the  Church  of  England,  a  priest.  He 
was  first  rector  at  Dunham,  and  afterwards  at 
Madeley.  He  became  a  model  pastor,  full  of  zeal 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  looked  after  all  the  in- 
terests of  his  people,  both  spirituallyand  intellect- 
ually. The  description  of  Mr.  Fletcher  from  the 
graceful  pen  of  Benson  presents  him  as  one  of  na- 
ture's noblemen.  "The  reader,"  says  Mr.  Benson, 
in  describing  Fletcher  at  Trevecca,  "  will  pardon 
me  if  he  thinks  I  exceed  ;  my  heart  kindles  while 
I  write.  Here  it  was  that  I  saw,  shall  I  say  an 
angel  in  human  flesh  ?  I  should  not  far  exceed 
the  truth  if  I  said  so.  But  here  I  saw  a  descendant 
of  fallen  Adam  so  fully  raised  above  the  ruins  of 
the  fall,  that,  though  by  the  body  he  was  tied  down 
to  earth,  yet  was  his  whole  conversation  in  heaven, 
yet  was  his  life  from  day  to  day  hid  with  Christ  in 
God.  Prayer,  praise,  love  and  zeal,  all  ardent, 
elevated  above  what  one  would  think  attainable  in 
this  state  of  frailty,  were  the  elements  in  which  he 
continually  lived.     Languages,  arts,  sciences,  gram- 


SCHOLARS  OF  ARMINIANISM.  183 

mar,  rhetoric,  logic,  even  divinity  itself,  as  it  is 
called,  were  all  laid  aside  when  he  appeared  in  the 
school-room  among  the  students;  and  they  seldom 
hearkened  long  before  they  were  all  in  tears,  and 
every  heart  caught  fire  from  the  flame  that  burned 
in  his  soul." 

Mr.  Fletcher  entered  heartily  into  the  great 
"  Quinquarticular  "  or  Calvinistic  discussion.  His 
"Checks  to  Antinomianism,"  in  a  clear  and  for- 
cible manner,  advocated  the  Arminian  view  of  pre- 
destination and  the  plan  of  salvation,  in  an  unan- 
swerable argument.  "They  comprehend  nearly 
every  important  thesis  on  the  subject."  They  treat 
of  "  the  highest  philosophical  questions,  theories 
of  freedom  of  the  will,  prescience,  and  fatalism." 
These  were  admirably  and  skillfully  presented. 
No  writer  has  better  balanced  the  apparently  con- 
tradictory passages  of  Scripture  on  these  questions. 
The  popular  argument  has  never,  perhaps,  been 
more  effectively  drawn  out.  No  polemical  work  of 
a  former  age  is  so  extensively  circulated  as  these 
"Checks." 

Mr.  Fletcher's  statement  of  Arminianism  is  as 
follows:  "The  second  covenant,  then,  or  the  gospel, 
is  a  dispensation  of  free  grace  and  mercy  (not  only 
to  little  children,  of  whom  is  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  but  also)  to  poor,  lost,  helpless  sinnefB, 
who,  seeing  and  feeling  themselves  condemned  by 
the  law  (of  innocence)  and  utterly  unable  to  ob- 
tain justification  upon  the  terms  of  the  first  cove- 


184  ARMINIA  NISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

nant,  come  to  (a  merciful  God  through)  Jesus  Christ 
(the  light  of  men  according  to  the  helps  afforded 
them  by  the  dispensation  which  they  are  uuderj  to 
seek  in  him  (and  from  him  those  merits  and)  that 
righteousness  which  they  have  not  in  themselves. 
For  the  Son  of  God,  being  both  God  and  man  in 
one  person,  and,  by  the  invaluable  sacrifice  of  him- 
self upon  the  cross,  having  suffered  the  punishment 
due  to  all  our  breaches  of  the  law  (of  works),  and 
by  hie  most  holy  life  having  answered  all  the  de- 
mands of  the  first  covenant,  'God  can  be  just, 
and  the  justifier  of  him  that  believes  in  Jesus.' 
Therefore,  if  a  sinner,  whose  mouth  is  stopped,  and 
who  has  nothing  1^  pay,  pleads  from  the  heart 
the  atoning  blood  of  Christ  (and  supposing  he 
never  heard  that  precious  name,  if  according  to 
his  light  he  implores  Divine  mercy,  for  the  free 
exercise  of  which  Christ's  blood  has  made  way), 
not  only  God  will  not  '  deliver  him  to  the  torment- 
ors,' but  will  frankly  forgive  him  all."  (Fletcher's 
Works,  Vol.  I,  p.  454.) 

Mr.  Fletcher  answers  Mr.  Toplady,  who  says, 
"  Arrainianism  paves  the  way  for  atheism  by  de- 
spoiling the  Divine  Being  of  his  unlimited  suprem- 
acy," after  the  following  manner:  "No,  it  only 
teaches  us  that  it  is  absurd  to  make  God's  suprem- 
acy bear  an  undue  pioportiou  to  his  other  perfec- 
tions. Do  we  despoil  the  king  of  his  manly  shape, 
because  we  deny  his  having  the  head  of  a  giant 
and  the  body  of  a  dwarf?      .     .     .      God  wisely 


SCHOLARS  OF  ARMINIANISiV.  185 

made  free  agents,  that  he  might  wisely  judge  them 
accordiug  to  their  works ;  and  it  is  one  of  our  ob- 
jections to  the  modern  doctrines  of  grace,  that  they 
despoil  (iod  of  his  Avisdom  in  both  these  re- 
spects. .  .  .  God  does  whatever  pleases  him 
in  heaven,  earth,  and  hell.  But  reason  and  Scrip- 
ture testify  that  he  does  not  choose  to  set  his  invin- 
cible power  against  his  unerring  wisdom,  by  over- 
powering, with  saving  grace  or  damning  Avrath, 
the  men  whom  he  is  going  judicially  to  reward  or 
punish.  .  .  .  When  we  say  that  the  promised 
reward  which  a  general  bestows  upon  a  soldier  for 
his  gallant  behavior  in  the  field,  depends  in  some 
measure  upon  the  soldier's  gallant  behavior,  do  we 
despoil  the  general  of  his  independency  with  re- 
spect to  the  soldier  ?  Must  the  general,  to  show 
himself  independent,  necessitate  some  of  his  sol- 
diers to  fight,  that  he  may  foolishly  promote  them ; 
and  others  to  desert  that  he  may  blow  their  brains 
out  with  Calvinian  independence  ?  When  we  as- 
sert that  God  justifies  men  according  to  their  faith, 
and  rewards  them  according  to  their  good  works  ;  or 
when  we  say  that  he  condemns  them  according  to 
their  unbelief,  and  punishes  them  according  to 
their  bad  works ;  do  we  intimate  that  he  betrays  the 
least  degree  of  mutability?  On  the  contrary,  do  we 
not  hereby  represent  him  as  faithfully  executing  his 
eternal,  immutable  decree  of  judging  and  treating 
men  according  to  their  works  of  faith  or  of  unbe- 
lief?"     (Fletcher's  Works,  Vol.  II,  pp.  228,  229.) 


s 


186  ARMINIANISM  IN  UISTORY. 

Thus  he  shows  iu  the  fullest  souse  that  Armin- 
ianism  "secures  to  God  the  houor  of  his  perfec- 
tions," and  "maintains  that  free  will  is  dependent 
on  free  grace."  He  further  shows  that  Ariuiuians 
"maintain  that  God,  in  his  infinite  wisdom  and 
power,  has  made  free  agents,  in  order  to  display  his 
goodness  by  rewarding  them  if  they  believe  and 
obey,  or  his  justice  by  punishing  them  if  they 
prove  faithless  and  disobedient.  Whichsoever  of  the 
two  therefore  comes  to  pass,  God  is  no  more  '  dis- 
concerted, disappointed,  embarrassed,'  etc.,  than  a 
lawgiver  and  judge  who  acquits  or  condemns  crim- 
inals according  to  his  own  law  and  to  their  own 
works.     (Fletcher,  Vol.  II,  pp.  229-236.) 

In  closing  the  Equal  Check,  Fletcher  gives  six 
conclusions  founded  upon  Scripture  which  clearly 
show  the  manner  in  which  Arminianism  esteems 
"  grace  and  justice:"  "(1)  That  as  God  is  both 
a  Benefactor  and  Governor,  a  Savior  and  Judge,  he 
has  both  a  throne  of  grace  and  a  throne  of  justice. 
(2)  That  those  believers  are  highly  partial  who  wor- 
ship only  before  one  of  the  divine  thrones,  when 
the  sacred  oracles  so  loudly  bid  us  to  pay  our  hom- 
age before  both.  (3)  That  the  doctrines  of  grace 
are  the  statutes  and  decrees  issuing  from  the  former. 
(4)  That  the  principle  of  all  the  doctrines  of  grace 
is,  that  there  is  an  election  of  grace ;  and  that  the 
principle  of  all  the  doctrines  of  justice  is,  that 
there  is  an  election  of  justice.  (5)  That  the  former 
of  those  elections  is  unconditional  and    partial,  as 


SCHOLARS  OF  ARMINIANISM.  187 

depending  merely  on  the  good  pleasure  of  our  gra- 
cious Benefactor  and  Savior  ;  and  that  the  latter  of 
these  elections  is  conditional  and  impartial,  as  de- 
pending merely  on  the  justice  and  equity  of  our 
righteous  Governor  and  Judge;  for  justice  ad- 
mits of  no  partiality,  and  equity  never  permits 
a  ruler  to  judge  any  men  but  such  as  are  free 
agents,  or  to  sentence  any  free  agent  otherwise 
than  according  to  his  own  works.  (6)  That 
the  confounding  or  not  properly  distinguishing 
those  two  elections,  and  the  reprobations  which 
they  draw  after  them,  has  tilled  the  Church  with 
confusion,  and  is  the  grand  cause  of  the  disputes 
which  destroy  our  peace.  To  restore  peace  to  the 
Church,  these  two  elections  must  be  fixed  upon 
their  proper  Scriptural  basis."  (Fletcher's  Works, 
Vol.  II,  p.  296.) 

His  two  essays,  the  first  on  '*  Bible  Calvinism, 
displaying  the  doctrines  of  partial  grace,  the  cap- 
ital error  of  the  Pelagians  and  the  excellency  of 
Scripture  Calvinism  ;"  the  second  on  "  Bible  Armin- 
ianism,  displaying  the  doctrines  of  impartial  justice, 
the  capital  error  of  the  Calvinists,  and  the  excel- 
lence of  Scripture  Arminianism,"  are  perhaps  "the 
most  impartial,  judicious,  and  eloquent  balancing 
of  the  two  systems  to  be  found  in  the  English  lan- 
guage." (See  Fletcher's  AVorks,  Vol.  II,  pp.  302- 
345.) 

As  a  sample  of  Fletcher's  use  of  language  in 
polemic  discussion,  let  us  take  this  :   "  Rigid  Calvin- 


188  A  RMINIA  NJSM  IN  HIS  TOE  7. 

ism  will  be  lost  in  Bible  Armiuianisru,  and  rigid 
Ariniiiianism  will  be  lost  in  Bible  Calvinism,  as  soon 
as  Protestants  will  pay  a  due  regard  to  the  follow- 
ing truths:  (1)  God,  for  Christ's  sake,  dissolved, 
with  respect  to  us,  the  paradisaical  covenant  of  in- 
nocence, when  he  turned  man  out  of  a  forfeited 
paradise  into  this  cursed  w'orld,  for  having  broken 
that  covenant.  Then  it  was  that  man's  Creator 
first  became  his  Redeemer ;  then  mankind  were 
placed  under  the  first  mediatorial  covenant  of  prom- 
ise. Then  our  Maker  gave  to  Adam,  and  to  all 
human  species,  which  was  in  Adam's  loins,  a  Savior, 
who  w'as  called  '  The  Seed  of  Woman,  the  Lamb 
slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world,'  who  was  to 
make  the  paradisaical  covenant  honorable  by  a  sin- 
less obedience.  (2)  Accordingly,  Christ,  by  the 
grace  of  God,  tasted  death  for  every  man;  purchas- 
ing for  all  men  the  privileges  of  a  general  covenant 
of  grace,  which  God  made  with  Adam  and  rati- 
fied to  Noah,  the  second  general  parent  of  mankind. 
(3)  Christ,  according  to  the  peculiar  predestina- 
tion and  election  of  God,  peculiarly  tasted  death 
for  the  Jews,  his  first  chosen  nation  and  peculiar 
people;  purchasing  for  them  all  the  privileges  of 
the  peculiar  covenant  of  grace,  which  the  Scriptures 
call  the  Old  Covenant  of  Peculiarity.  (4)  That 
Christ,  according  to  the  most  peculiar  predestina- 
tion and  election  of  God,  most  peculiarly  tasted 
death  for  the  Christians,  his  second  chosen  nation 
and  most  peculiar  people ;    procuring  for  them  the 


SCHOLARS  OF  ARMINIANISM.  189 

invaluable  privileges  of  his  OAvn  most  precious  Gos- 
pel, '  by  which  he  has  brought  life  and  immortality 
to  meridian  light,'  and  has  richly  supplied  the  de- 
fects of  the  Noachian  and  Mosaic  dispensations ; 
the  first  of  which  is  noted  for  its  darkness,  and  the 
second  for  its  veils  and  shadows.  And  lastly,  that 
with  respect  to  these  peculiar  privileges,  Christ  is 
said  to  have  peculiarly  '  given  himself  for  the 
Christian  Church,  that  he  might  cleanse  it  with  the 
baptismal  washing  of  water  by  the  Word '  (Ephe- 
sians  v,  26) ;  peculiarly  '  purchasing  it  with  his 
blood'  (Acts,  XX,  28);  and  delivering  it  from  hea- 
thenish darkness  and  Jewish  shadows,  that  it  might 
be  'redeemed  from  all  iniquity,'  and  that  his  Chris- 
tian people  might  be  '  a  peculiar  people  to  himself, 
zealous  of  good  works,'  even  above  the  Jews,  who 
'  fear  God,'  and  the  Gentiles,  who  '  work  righteous- 
ness.'" (Fletcher's  Works,  Vol.  II,  pp.  339-340.) 
Richard  Watson  may  be  called  the  father  of 
Methodist  systematic  theology  constructed  on  the 
Arminian  basis.  He  was  born  at  Barton-on-Hum- 
ber,  Lincolnshire,  February  22,  1781.  "Wild  and 
impetuous  in  youth,  feeble  in  body  but  precocious 
in  mind,  he  sought  an  education,  and,  though  un- 
able to  pursue  a  full  course,  he  succeeded  by  his 
own  efforts  in  becoming  a  well-educated  man.  Con- 
verted when  thirteen,  and  preaching  at  fifteen  years 
of  age,  he  started  upon  a  career  of  usefulness  des- 
tined to  bring  glory  and  lionor,  together  with  doc- 
trinal stability,  to  the  Church.  As  a  man,  Richard 
13 


190  A  UMINJA  NJSM  IN  HIST  OR  Y. 

Watson  was  one  of  the  rao.^t  consj)icuous  in  Wes- 
leyan  Methodism  at  the  beginning  of  the  present 
century.  He  was  a  man  of  genius  in  several  lines. 
His  mind  was  versatile.  80  great  were  his  attain- 
ments that  contemporaries  of  other  communities  and 
beliefs  spoke  in  the  highest  terms  of  him.  Says 
Robert  Hall:  'He  soars  into  regions  of  thought 
where  no  genius  but  his  own  can  penetrate,'  The 
London  Quarterly  Review  said:  '  Watson  had  not  the 
earnestness  and  force  of  Chalmers,  but  he  possessed 
much  more  thought,  philosophy,  calm  ratiocination, 
and  harmonious  fullness.  He  had  not,  perhaps,  the 
metaphysical  subtilty  and  rapid  combination,  the 
burning  affections  and  elegant  diction  of  Hall,  but 
he  possessed  as  keen  a  reason,  a  more  lofty  imag- 
ination, an  equal  or  superior  power  of  painting, 
and,  we  think,  a  much  more  vivid  perception  of 
the  spiritual  world  and  a  richer  leaven  of  evan- 
gelical sentiment.'" 

Such  was  the  man  whose  heart  was  fired  with 
love  for  all  mankind,  whose  mind  was  broad  enough 
to  comprehend  the  teaching  of  the  apostle,  that 
Jesus  Christ  suffered  death  for  all  mankind,  and 
the  words  of  Jesus  that  "God  so  loved  the  world 
that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever 
believeth  on  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  ever- 
lasting life,"  and  who  had  the  courage  of  his  con- 
victions to  teach  this  theology  in  a  strong,  scientific, 
masterly  manner.  His  "Theological  Institutes"  is 
a  "view  of  the  evidences,  doctrines,  morals,  and  in- 


SCHOLARS  OF  ARMINIANISM.  191 

stitutions  of  Christianity."  It  was  designed  to  be 
a  "book  of  Christianity,"  adapted  to  the  present 
state  of  theological  literature,  neither  Calvinistic 
.on  the  one  hand,  nor  Pelagian  on  the  other.  In 
the  "  advei-tisement "  to  the  London  edition  of  1823 
the  author  says:  "The  object  has  been  to  follow 
a  course  of  plain  and  close  argument  on  the  vari- 
ous subjects  discussed,  without  any  attempt  at  em- 
bellishment of  style,  and  without  adding  practical 
uses  and  reflections,  which,  while  however  impor- 
tant, did  not  fall  within  the  plan  of  this  publica- 
tion." "The  various  controversies  on  fundamen- 
tal and  important  points  have  been  introduced ; 
but  it  has  been  the  sincere  aim  of  the  author  to  dis- 
cuss every  subject  with  fairness  and  candor,  and 
honestly,  but  in  the  spirit  of  the  Truth,  which  he 
more  anxiously  wishes  to  be  taught  than  to  teach,  to 
exhibit  what  he  believes  to  be  the  sense  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  to  whose  authority,  he  trusts,  he  has 
unreservedly  subjected  all  his  own  oj^inions." 

Mr.  Watson  devotes  467  pages  to  the  treatment 
of  the  question  of  the  "  doctrines  relating  to  man." 
The  work  is  exhaustive.  It  shows  the  most  exten- 
sive reading  of  Calvinistic  and  Arminian  litei'ature, 
together  with  heathen  philosophy,  and  a  complete 
collation  and  comparison  of  doctrinal  sentiments. 
It  brings  out  root  ideas  of  man's  condition  in  sin, 
God  in  Christ  Jesus  reconciling  the  world  to  him- 
self, the  sacrifice  of  Christ  ample  in  extent  and 
power  to  bring  all   the  world  to  eternal  salvation, 


192  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

and  that  there  is  given  to  all  men  such  freedom  of 
will  that  they  can  be  turned  .to  Christ  and  obtain 
salvation,  or  they  can,  by  the  will,  reject  all  otters 
of  life  and  mercy,  and  be  eternally  lost.  It  is  no. 
great  wonder  that  the  elder  Hodge  says  of  "Wat- 
son's "Institutes:"  "  Excellent,  and  well  worthy  of 
its  high  repute  among  Methodists ;"  or  that  Dr. 
J.  W.  Alexander  says:  "  Turretin  is  in  theology 
'  instar  omnium;'  that  is,  so  far  as  Blackstone  is  in 
law,  making  due  allowance  for  difference  in  age. 
Watson,  the  Methodist,  is  the  only  systematizer 
within  my  knowledge  who  approaches  the  same  em- 
inence, of  whom  in  Addison's  words,  'He  reasons 
like  Paley  and  descants  like  Hall.'  " 

William  Burt  Pope,  A.  M.,  theological  tutor  in 
Didsbury  College,  Manchester,  England,  has  pro-- 
duced  a  second  great  work  on  Systematic  Theology, 
based  on  Arminiauism.  It  is  a  comj^endium  of 
"  Christian  Theology,"  and  consists  of  "  Analytical 
Outlines  of  a  Course  of  Theological  Study,  Biblical 
Dogmatic,  and  Historical."  His  treatment  of  sin, 
original  and  actual,  of  the  mediatorial  ministry,  or 
providing  an  universal  redemption,  and  the  adminis- 
tration of  redemption,  is  fully  and  masterfully  done. 
Of  the  universality  of  redemption  he  whites :  "  The 
price  was  paid  down  for  all  men  for  the  entire 
race,  or  for  the  entire  nature  of  man  in  all  its  rep- 
resentatives from  the  first  transgressor  to  the  last. 
Redemption  as  such  is  universal"  (which  forms  the 
basis  of  a  particular   application).       "The  media- 


"W^ 


SCHOLARS  OF  ARMINIANISM.  193 

torial  government  of  the  world  from  the  beginning 
has  been  a  fruit  and  a  proof  of  one  great  deliver- 
ance." "The  Scripture  speaks  only  of  one  grand 
redemption  ;  but  it  distinguishes,  speaking  of  Him, 
who  is  the  Savior  of  all  men,  specially  of  those 
that  believe.  Here  the  special  is  other  than  the 
general  redemption,  though  springing  from  it; 
what  makes  it  special  is  not  the  decree  of  sover- 
eignty, but  the  faith  of  those  who  embrace  it.  .  .  . 
Hence,  as  there  is  no  deliverance  which  is  not  in- 
dividual, and  no  salvation  which  is  not  deliverance, 
the  whole  history  of  personal  religion  is  exhibited 
in  terms  of  Redemption  :  it  is  the  release  of  the 
will,  which  is  the  universal  benefit,  the  repentance 
which  is  bestowed  by  the  Spirit  of  bondage,  the 
release  from  the  law  of  death  in  justification  and 
regeneration,  the  redeeming  from  all  iniquity  in  en- 
tire sanctification,  the  final  expected  redemption  of 
the  groaning  creature,  and  the  deliverance  of  the 
saints  from  the  present  evil  world."  (Pope,  Vol.  II, 
pp.  296-297.) 

Dr.  Adam  Clarke  may  be  recognized  as  the 
great  Wesleyan  Methodist  divine,  antiquarian.  Ori- 
entalist, and  commentator.  As  a  theologian,  he 
was  Arminian  excepting  in  regard  to  the  eternal 
Souship  of  Christ.  The  commentaries  that  came 
from  his  fertile  pen  on  the  lines  of  oi-iginal  sin, 
the  atonement  for  sin  by  Christ,  universal  redemp- 
tion, and  the  freedom  of  the  will,  are  grounded  in 
the  Biblical  teaching  and  Arminian  thought. 


194  A  RMINIA  NISM  IN  HIST  OR  Y. 

Dr.  Clarke  was  born  in  Moybeg,  about  1762. 
He  was  a  strong  boy  in  physical  character,  but  was 
dull  of  mind,  until,  smarting  under  the  sarcasms  of 
school-fellows,  he  suddenly  aroused  from  his  mental 
lethargy,  and  at  once  began  such  a  study  as  far 
outstripped  all  his  fellows  and  placed  him  in  the 
front  rank  of  the  world's  greatest  scholars.  The 
Commentary  of  Dr.  Clarke  was  the  work  of  years, 
he  being  about  thirty  years  in  its  composition.  It  at 
once  became  a  standard  work,  was  extensively  cir- 
culated, and  held  its  place  in  the  front  rank  for 
many  years.  Even  now,  although  somewhat  super- 
seded by  later  works,  it  is  a  standard  for  reference, 
and  wields  an  influence  far  beyond*  the  limits  of 
Methodism. 

In  America  have  appeared  writers  and  theolo- 
gians holding  and  advocating  the  Arminian  view  as 
strongly  as  any  in  Europe.  The  Avork  of  Miner 
Raymond,  D.  D. ,  for  along  time  a  professor  in  the 
Garrett  Biblical  Institute,  will  stand  as  a  great  au- 
thority in  systematic  theology.  It  is  pre-eminently 
Arminian  in  its  doctrine,  and  equally  evangelistic. 
At  no  time  has  there  been  any  adverse  criticism  of 
this  work  as  to  its  Arminian  character. 

But  it  is  probable  that  D.  D.  Whedon,  LL.  D., 
for  so  long  a  time  editor  of  the  Methodkt  C^nartedy 
Review,  and  a  successful  commentator  upon  the  New 
Testament  Scriptures,  has  added  more  largely  to  the 
occult   matter   of  Arminianism  and  shown  the  in- 


SCHOLA  RS  OF  A RMINIA  NI8M.  195 

consistency  of  Calvinistic  theories,  than  any  other 
man  of  the  last  half  of  the  present  century.  Whe- 
don's  "Freedom  of  the  Will  as  a  Basis  of  Human 
Responsibility  and  Divine  Government"  is  a  work 
of  remarkable  breadth  of  thought,  acumen  of  re- 
search, and  clear  statement.  It  is  a  "substantial 
contribution  to  the  most  difficult  of  all  psycholog- 
ical and  moral  problems,  the  reconciliation  of  the 
sense  of  capital  responsibility  with  our  intellectual 
conclusions  regarding  the  nature  of  the  choice." 
Dr.  Whedon  defines  "will"  to  be  that  power  of 
the  soul  by  which  it  intentionally  originates  an 
act  or  state  of  being.  Or,  more  precisely,  will 
is  the  power  of  the  soul  by  which  it  is  the  con- 
scious author  of  an  intentional  act.  (Freedom  of 
Will,  p.  15.)  In  treating  of  the  Calvinistic  doc- 
trine of  predestination.  Dr.  Whedon  speaks  of  it  as 
an  "  unnecessary  hypothesis,"  and  proceeds  to  con- 
struct the  system  of  God's  divine  government  after 
the  Arminian  hypothesis. 

Another  strong  controversial  Arminian  writer 
was  Rev.  Wilbur  Fisk,  D.  D.,  President  of  Wes- 
leyan  University.  His  work  bore  the  title  "Cal- 
vinistic Controversy :  Embracing  a  Sermon  on 
Predestination  and  Election."  It  was  especially 
designed  to  sho\\i.  the  fallacies  of  New  England 
theology  in  particular,  and  predestination  or  election 
in  general.  Dr.  Fisk  aimed  to  show  that  "  the  Cal- 
vinistic predestination  is,  on  any  grounds  of  consist- 


196  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

ency,  utterly  irrecoDcilable  with  mental  freedom." 
He  spent  considerable  time  on  the  changes  in  Cal- 
vinism in  New  England,  and  the  "  indefiniteness  of 
Calvinism"  as  a  system.  The  "Metaphysical  The- 
ory of  Dr.  Hopkins,"  which  had  for  its  leading 
dogma  that  "God  was  the  efficient  cause  of  all 
moral  action,  holy  and  unholy,  and  that  holiness 
consisted  in  disinterested  benevolence,"  was  shown 
to  be  consistent  with  the  question  put  to  a  person 
desirous  of  judging  of  the  possession  of  a  religious 
experience:  "Are  you  willing  to  be  damned?"  If 
willing,  it  was  a  wholesome  sign  that  the  will  was 
made  to  be  in  harmony  with  God  ;  but  if  not  will- 
ing to  be  damned,  he  was  yet  in  his  sins. 

Dr.  Fisk  demonstrated  the  tendency  of  the  hu- 
man mind  to  run  into  extremes,  illustrating  it  by 
Calvinism,  from  which  there  was  a  revolt  which 
found  no  one  standing  on  the  middle  line  in  the 
exact  place  of  truth,  and  went  to  the  other  extreme 
of  New  England  Unitarianism  and  Universalism. 
The  Church  was  startled  when  a  posthumous  book 
of  a  Calvinistic  clergyman  appeared,  entitled  "Cal- 
vinism Improved."  "It  was  merely  an  extension  of 
the  doctrine  of  unconditional  election  and  irresisti- 
ble grace  to  all,  instead  of  a  part.  From  the  prem- 
ises the  reasoning  seemed  fair,  and  the  conclusions 
legitimate.  This  made  many  converts.  And  the 
idea  of  universal  salvation,  when  once  it  is  era- 
braced,  can  easily  be  molded  into  any  shape,  pro- 
vided its  main    feature  is  retained.     It   has  finally 


SCHOLARS   OF  ARMINIANISM.  197 

pretty  generally  run  into  the  semi-infidel  sentiments 
of  no  atonement,  no  Divine  Savior,  no  Holy  Ghost, 
and  no  supernatural  change  of  heart ;  as  well  as  no 
hell,  no  devil,  no  angry  God."  (Fisk's  Calvinistic 
Controversy,  p.  88.) 

Dr.  Fisk  unmasked  the  subtil  ties  of  the  "  New 
Divinity"  of  New  England,  which  had  been  advo- 
cated by  the  theological  professors  of  Yale  College 
of  his  day.  It  had  two  pillars :  1.  Sin  is  not  a 
propagated  property  of  the  human  soul,  but  con- 
sists wholly  in  moral  exercise ;  2.  Sin  is  not  the 
necessary  means  of  the  greatest  good.  The  results 
of  such  tenets  are  clearly  to  be  seen.  Point  after 
point  in  the  arguments  of  the  Predestinarianist 
was  taken  up,  and  the  opposite  views  of  Arminian- 
ism  were  presented  in  the  rich  but  terse  style  of 
Dr.  Fisk,  Calvinism  was  shown  to  be  antagonized 
by  Arminianism  upon  a  thoroughly  rational  basis. 
The  entire  controversy  was  carried  out  in  a  mas- 
terly, learned,  and  Christian  spirit. 

Having  thus  far  traced  the  history  of  the  growth 
and  development  of  the  system  of  Arminianism,  it 
is  not  necessary  to  carry  this  particular  thought  fur- 
ther. We  are  led  to  certain  conclusions  which  are 
inevitable  from  the  facts  which  have  been  adduced. 

(1)  Arminianism  is  not  the  product  of  late  pe- 
riods in  the  nineteen  centuries  about  past,  but  was 
a  line  of  doctrine  held  and  advocated  by  the  apos- 
tles and  the  flithers  of  the  early  Church.  The  in- 
troduction of   this    system  of   theology  by  Koorn- 


198  A RMINIA NISM  IN  HI8 TORT. 

hert,  Simon  Episcopius,  and  others,  was  not  an  in- 
novation upon  any  of  the  systems  which  had  been 
invented  and  promulgated,  but  was  a  return  to  the 
thought  of  the  primitive  Christians. 

(2)  Tlie  advocacy  of  Arminianism,  in  its  day, 
was  looked  upon  as  almost  a  crime,  and  those  who 
have  stood  out  in  the  front  ranks  of  its  advocacy 
have  been  often  branded  with  holding  doctrines 
diametrically  opposed  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus 
Christ — a  statement  that  is  not  true ;  for  no  class 
of  men  have  ever  been  stronger  and  more  rigid  in 
their  advocacy  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  prim- 
itive Christianity  than  these  Arminians. 

(3)  Upon  the  principles  of  Arminianism  there 
can  be  constructed  a  systematic  theology  which 
shall  be  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  teachings  of 
Jesus  Christ  and  the  inspired  apostles,  and  the  con- 
sciousness of  believing  hearts  under  the  influences 
and  enlightenment  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

(4)  The  work  of  those  who  have  adopted  the 
Arrainian  system  of  theology  has  not  been  to  tear 
down  or  prevent  the  work  of  other  systems,  but 
has  gone  out  to  the  low  and  wicked  of  the  world, 
and  has  lifted  up  a  redeemed  humanity,  and 
brought  it  into  communion  with  the  Divine  Being, 
until  it  has  been  filled  with  the  power  of  divine 
love,  and  been  able  to  accomplish  the  greatest  work 
in  human  elevation.  It  has  moved  forward  steadily 
in  the  times  and  conditions  of  persecution,  and  has 
sought  for  but  one  thing;  namely,  the  glory  of  God 


SCHOLARS  OF  AR3IINIANIS3L  199 

and  the  salvation  of  men.  During  this  time  it  has 
been  exerting  a  powerful  influence  for  good,  upon 
the  old  Culviniau  theology  on  the  one  hand,  and 
the  latitudiuarianism  of  Pelagianism,  Socinianism, 
and  Universalism  on  the  other  hand,  bringing  the 
rigid  more  nearly  to  the  line  of  the  Scripture,  and 
restraining  the  others  from  going  far  away  into  the 
darkness  of  sin. 


■  Chapter  X. 

ARMINIANISM  AND  THE  FRIENDS. 

Kevolt  of  the  Friends  from  Predestination — George  Fox — 
Led  into  a  Study  of  Predestination — Meditation  and 
Prayer — Searched  tlie  Scriptures — Worshiped  much — 
Greatly  persecuted — A  Devout  People — Barclay's  De- 
nunciation of  Predestination  Unconditional — Nine  Rea- 
sons against  it — Barclay's  Doctrine  of  Atonement  Essen- 
tially Arminian  —  Barclay's  Apology  —  King  Charles 
II  and  Barclay's  Apology — Thomas  Evans — New  State- 
ment of  Doctrine  made  at  Richmond,  Indiana — Dele- 
gates from  all  the  Friends'  Societies  in  the  World — The 
Creed  of  the  Society  of  Friends  is  Arminian  throughout. 

When  a  doctrine  of  so  revolting  a  nature  as 
tliat  of  unconditional  predestination  and  reproba- 
tion is  extensively  advocated,  and  is  thereby  wide- 
spread over  the  world,  it  may  be  expected  that 
sooner  or  later  minds  will  revolt  therefrom,  and 
publicly  dissent  from  the  thralldom  of  such  doc- 
trines, and  seek  for  something  better  and  moi'e  in 
harmony  with  the  written  Word  of  God.  Armin- 
ianism  was  such  a  revolt.  Strong  and  thoughtful 
minds  could  not  read  the  Word  and  find  the  pre- 
destination doctrine  in  it.  This  revolt  spread  far 
and  wide.  It  influenced  many  minds.  It  was 
not  neccessary  that  all  should  take  the  exact  form 
of  Arminianism  in  order  to  be  in  a  similar  re- 
volt. There  were  several  centers  of  revolt,  from 
200 


ARMINIANISM  AND  THE  FRIENDS.         201 

which  issued  lines  of  influence  of  greater  or  less 
degree.  These  moved  many  minds  in  Europe.  It 
was  not  necessary  that  these  centers  should  have 
any  real  or  implied  connection  until  after  the  doc- 
trines were  well  advanced,  and  the  discussions  so 
far  advanced  as  to  give  promise  that  they  could  not 
be  overturned.  The  testimony  of  history  is  that, 
in  the  early  part  of  the  seventeenth  century,  there 
were  in  dili'erent  parts  of  Europe  taught  doctrines 
bearing  a  striking  resemblance  to  those  of  Arminius 
and  Episcopius.  The  doctrines  of  Calvinism  had 
been  widespread.  They  had  been  taught  in  all 
their  repulsiveness.  Men  of  broader  and  more  lib- 
eral views  revolted  from  such  teaching,  and  searched 
out  a  better  method  of  interpreting  the  Divine 
mind  and  "decrees"  than  that  pursued  at  Geneva. 
One  of  the  prominent  peoples  in  those  later 
years,  who,  a  little  later  than  the  day  of  James  Ar- 
minius, arose  and  began  the  revolt  from  predestina- 
tionism  and  reprobation  unconditionally,  was  the 
Friends,  or  Quakers.  They  had  their  origin  in 
George  Fox,  born  at  Leicestershire,  England,  in 
162-i,  of  pious  parents,  members  of  the  Anglican 
Church.  These  godly  parents  taught  him  the  ways 
of  religion  early  in  life,  and  he  was  religiously  in- 
clined at  an  early  age.  In  the  consciousness  that 
his  relation  to  God  needed  to  be  intensified,  at  nine- 
teen years  of  age  he  was  "led  by  a  sense  of  duty 
to  seek  retirement  from  the  world,  and  he  spent 
much   time   in   reading  the   Holy   Scriptures,  with 


202  A RMINIANJSM  IN  HISTORY. 

meditation  and  prayer.  In  the  year  1647  he  began 
to  appear  as  a  preacher  of  the  gospel,  and  he 
found  many  prepared  to  receive  his  messages  of 
love,  calling  them  away  from  a  reliance  upon  all 
rites  and  ceremonies  to  the  Word  of  divine  grace, 
or  Spirit  of  Christ,  as  the  efficient  cause  of  salva- 
tion." It  was  not  long  before  there  were  converts 
to  his  doctrine,  and  the  numbers  attending  upon 
his  preaching  were  very  large.  These  converts 
spent  much  time  in  divine  worship,  Avaitiug  in 
silence  for  the  coming  of  God's  Spirit  into  them 
with  enlightenment.  When  the  Spirit  came,  they 
prayed,  praised,  and  preached  as  they  felt,  under 
the  Spirit  of  God. 

From  the  first,  George  Fox  preached  that 
"whosoever  would,  might  come  to  God  by  Jesus 
Christ,  and  be  eternally  saved."  While  he  and  his 
followers  did  not  denounce  or  attack  the  doctrine  of 
election  and  reprobation  as  held  by  the  Reformed 
Church,  they  did,  in  the  most  emphatic  manner, 
teach  the  freedom  of  the  will  and  a  full  salvation 
for  all  men  on  the  condition  of  repentance  of  sin 
and  faith  in  Jesus  Christ.  So  successful  was  Fox  in 
advocating  his  liberal  theories  that,  at  his  death  in 
1690,  there  were  at  least  75,000  members  of  the 
body  of.  Friends.  They  developed  splendid  talent. 
George  Fox,  William  Penn,  William  Pennington, 
and  Robert  Barclay  were  men  of  no  ordinary  talent, 
and  were  brilliant  expositors  of  the  new  doctrine. 

The  Society  of  Friends  has  been  greatly  perse- 


ARMINIANISM  AND  THE  FRIENDS.         203 

ciited  at  times,  has  suffered  at  the  hands  of  ene- 
mies, governments,  and  schisms ;  but  it  has  held  on 
its  way  in  the  strong  advocacy  of  the  doctrines 
early  formulated,  which  encouraged  sinners  to 
venture  fully  on  the  merits  of  a  crucified  and 
risen  Christ  for  salvation.  They  have  never  known 
that  there  was  any  difference  in  the  mind  of  the 
Father  toward  human  souls  when  he  devised  the 
plan  of  redemption,  or  in  the  mind  of  Jesus  when 
he  became  incarnate  and  perfected  the  atonement. 
They  taught  that  Jesus  died  for  all  men. 

The  character  of  the  early  >Society  of  Friends 
as  a  devout  people,  and  their  antagonism  to  the 
predestination  and  reprobation  of  men  uncondition- 
ally, is  found  in  their  writings.  Robert  Barclay 
recited  the  doctrines  of  Calvinism  in  such  terms  as 
evinced  that  he  was  fully  conversant  with  them. 
He  used  the  terms,  "eternal  and  immutable  de- 
cree," "predestinated  to  eternal  damnation  the  far 
greater  part  of  mankind,"  "without  any  respect  to 
their  disobedience  or  sin,"  "for  the  demonstrating 
of  the  glory  of  its  justice,"  etc.,  in  precisely  the  same 
sense  as  the  Genevan  theologians  used  them.  Bar- 
clay called  this  a  "horrible  and  blasphemous  doc- 
trine." He  gave  reasons  :  1.  "  It  is  a  novelty ;  for 
it  was  not  known  for  the  first  four  hundred  years 
after  Christ."  2.  "It  is  highly  injurious  to  God, 
because  it  makes  him  the  author  of  sin."  3.  "It 
makes  God  delight  in  the  death  of  sinners."  4.  It 
renders   "Christ's   mediation    ineffectual."     5.    "It 


204  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

makes  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  a  mere  mock 
aud  illusion."  6.  "It  makes  Christ's  coming,  and 
sacrifice  a  testimony  of  God's  wrath  to  the  world, 
and  one  of  the  greatest  judgments,"  for  it  saves  a 
very  few  of  the  race.  7.  "It  renders  mankind 
in  a  far  worse  condition  than  the  devils  in  hell." 
8.  The  preaching  of  Christ's  gospel  is  an  absurdity, 
for  it  "makes  the  Lord  to  send  forth  his  servants 
with  a  lie  in  their  mouth,"  commanding  them  to 
invite  all  men  to  come  to  him  and  be  saved,  when 
only  a  very  few  are  called  and  can  come.  9.  It 
makes  prayer  for  sinners  of  no  avail,  and  places 
Paul  in  a  foolish  light  before  the  world  when  he  ex- 
horts Timothy,  "that  first  of  all;  supplications, 
prayers,  intercessions,  and  giving  of  thanks  be  made 
for  all  men."  Barclay,  and  all  of  his  followers, 
started  back  with  horror  from  the  Calvinistic  doc- 
trine of  reprobation  irrespective  of  condition. 

On  the  other  hand,  Mr.  Barclay  places  the 
atonement  by  the  sufferings  and  shedding  of  blood 
of  Jesus  Christ  as  the  central  doctrine  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  out  of  it  comes  the  other  great  doctrine 
so  full  of  spiritual  comfort,  that,  by  this  full  atone- 
ment, salvation  is  made  possible  for  all  men.  He 
cites  many  proofs,  all  of  which  are  held  by  the 
Friends'  Society  unto  this  day.  He  shows  :  1.  That 
it  is  positively  affirmed  in  the  Scripture.  2.  Christ 
doth  not  will  that  any  should  })crish.  3.  The  doc- 
trine is  abundantly  confirmed  by  the  Apostle  John. 
4.  Augustine  said  in  commenting  on  the  ninety-fifth 


ARMINIANISM  AND  THE  FRIENDS.         205 

Psalm:  "The  blood  of  Christ  is  of  so  great  worth 
that  it  is  of  no  less  value  than  the  whole  world." 
5.  Others  of  the  fathers  of  the  Church  uttered  as 
strong  languarge.  6.  God,  out  of  his  infinite  love, 
sent  his  Son,  who  tasted  death  for  every  man,  Jew 
or  Gentile,  Turk  or  Scythian,  Indian  or  barbarian, 
and  made  it  possible  for  them  to  be  saved.  7.  God 
sends  his  Light  and  Seed  to  invite,  call,  exhort,  and 
strive  with  every  man  in  order  to  save  him. 

Mr.  Barclay  proceeds  to  show  that  since  ' '  God 
willeth  no  man  to  perish,"  he  hath  therefore 
"given  to  all  grace  sufficient  for  salvation."  God 
offers  to  work  this  salvation  during  the  day  of  every 
man's  visitation,  "by  giving  to  every  man  a  meas- 
ure of  saving,  sufficient,  and  supernatural  light  and 
grace."  In  the  Parable  of  the  Sower,  Christ  tells 
"that  this  saving  Light  and  Seed,  or  a  measure  of 
it,  is  given  to  all."  Byjthis  Light  and  Seed  "  many 
have  been  and  some  may  be  saved,  to  whom  the 
gospel  hath  never  been  outwardly  preached,  and 
who  are  utterly  ignorant  of  the  outward  history  of 
Christ."  "If  all  men  have  received  a  loss  from 
Adam  which  leads  to  condemnation,  then  all  men 
have  received  a  gift  from  Christ  which  leads  to 
justification." 

The  above  selections  from  Barclay's  "Apology 
for  the  True  Christian  Divinity,"  and  many  more 
that  might  be  quoted,  are  conclusive  evidence  of  the 
revolt  in  may  of  the  English  minds  against  the  doc- 
trines of  predestination  and  reprobation  uncondi- 
14 


206  A  R  MIX  I A  XISM  IN  HIS  TOR  F. 

tional,  as  taught  by  Calviu  and  Beza  at  Geneva.  To 
Barclay  there  was  an  intolerable  repugnance  to 
them.  While  in  Holland,  and  elsewhere  on  tlie 
Continent,  was  going  on  this  debate  between  Armin- 
ians  and  Calviuists,  in  England  Barclay  and  his  fol- 
lowers were  striking  right  and  left  against  the  doc- 
trines of  Calvinism.  The  contest  in  ICnglaud  was 
not  quite  so  turbulent  as  on  the  Continent,  but  it 
was  as  sharp  and  determined.  ]Men  of  culture  were 
on  either  side.  The  stores  of  (jreek  and  Latin  lit- 
erature were  open,  and  poured  out  plentifully  on 
either  side, 

Barclay's  Apology  was  sent  to  King  Charles  II 
in  1675,  and  was  designed  to  set  forth  fully  and 
truly  the  doctrines  and  polity  of  the  Friends.  The 
king  was  in  error  as  to  the  nature,  design,  and 
conduct  of  this  people.  He  had  been  led  to  look 
upon  them  as  dangerous  to  his  interests  and  the 
welfare  of  the  English  Commonwealth.  Hence,  it 
became  Barclay  to  take  the  teachings  of  George 
Fox  and  the  followers  of  this  man  of  God,  and 
clearly  set  forth  the  real  doctrines  and  character  of 
the  Friends.  As  an  A})ology  it  was  masterly.  It 
then  stood  the  test  of  criticism,  and  has  so  stood 
up  to  this  date. 

If  we  follow  the  course  of  doctrinal  teaching  of 
the  Friends,  it  will  be  found  that  they  have  main- 
tained the  same  belief  under  all  changes.  In  the' 
book  by  Thomas  Evans,  bearing  the  title  "A  Con- 
cise Account   of  the  Religious    Society  of  Friends, 


ARMINIANISM  AND  THE  FRIENDS.         207 

Commonly  Called  Quakers,"  and  published  by  au- 
thority of  the  society,  there  is  clearly  stated  the  be- 
lief of  the  people  regarding  the  extent  of  salvation 
provided  by  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ.  "There- 
fore, Christ  hath  tasted  death  for  every  man  ;  not 
only  for  all  kinds  of  men,  as  some  vainly  talk,  but 
for  every  man  of  all  kinds ;  the  benefit  of  whose 
offering  is  not  only  extended  to  those  who  have  the 
distinct  outward  knowledge  of  his  death  and  suffer- 
ings, as  the  same  is  declared  in  the  Scriptures,  but 
even  unto  those  who  are  necessarily  excluded  from 
the  benefit  of  this  knowledge  by  some  inevitable 
accident."  (Page  9o.  Ed.  published  by  Friends' 
Bookstore,  o04  Arch  Street,  Philadelphia.) 

When  the  Society  of  Friends  determined  to 
formulate  a  new  Creed,  or  "  Declaration  of  some 
of  the  Fundamental  Principles  of  Christian  Truth," 
it  was  not  to  change  any  of  the  vital  doctrines 
held  for  so  many  years,  or  to  indicate  that  they 
were  weary  of  or  wavered  in  anything  held  by  the 
fathers  of  their  sect,  but  to  state  these  great  and 
fundamental  truths  in  the  language  of  this  day. 

The  Conference  assembled  in  Richmond,  Indi- 
ana, the  ninth  mouth  28,  1887.  It  was  formed 
of  delegates  from  all  the  yearly  meetings  of  the 
world.  They  were  among  the  strongest  and  most 
thoughtful  men  of  the  entire  society.  They  were 
scholarly  and  learned  in  doctrine.  Many  were 
giants  in  debate,  as  the  stenographic  report  evi- 
dences.    They  came  to  the  work  of  reviewing  the 


208  A  RMINIA NISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

doctrines  and  usages  of  the  Friends  with  a  clear  in- 
sight into  the  motives  leading  thereto,  and  as  clear 
a  comprehension  of  what  effects  would  flow  from  a 
restatement  of  their  doctrines,  and  the  dangers  at- 
tending the  same.  After  determining  that  it  was 
desirable  that  "  all  yearly  meetings  of  Friends  in 
the  world  should  adopt  one  declaration  of  Chris- 
tian faith,"  they  took  up  the  old  statements  of  Fox, 
Penn,  Barclay,  and  others,  and  held  them  in  the 
light  of  all  the  Calvinistic,  Pelagian,  Socinian,  and 
skeptical  discussions  and  controversies  from  1647  to 
1887,  and  after  carefully,  thoughtfully,  and  prayer- 
fully examining  them  with  the  light  of  two  hundred 
and  forty  years  shed  upon  them,  they  adopted  the 
same  formularies,  only  changing  the  verbiage  so  as 
to  conform  with  the  style  of  language  of  to-day. 
Unchanged  stands  their  doctrine  of  a  universal  sal- 
vation provided  for  all  men,  and  enjoyed  by  every 
man  who,  by  repentance  and  faith,  comes  to  Jesus 
Christ.  They  are  Arminian  throughout.  No  un- 
certain sound  is  given  regarding  original  sin,  free- 
dom of  the  will,  or  the  sufficiency  of  grace.  Who- 
soever will,  may  come  to  Jesus  Christ  and  be  saved. 
By  this  declaration  of  faith  they  demonstrated  to 
the  world  that  they  are  satisfied  with  the  doctrines 
of  the  Fathers,  they  have  no  apologies  to  make  for 
preaching  a  salvation  provided  for  all  men,  they 
have  not  been  disturbed  by  controversies  or  changed 
by  every  wind  of  doctrine,  but  steadily  hold  on  to 
the  old  faith,  and  recognize  the  old  landmarks. 


Chapter  XI. 

ARMINIANISM  AND  REVIVALS. 

Armiuianism  in  Contact  with  Win  and  Sinnei's — A  Kevival 
and  Evangelizing  Doctrine  —  A  System  that  can  be 
preached  in  all  its  Fullness — Characters  of  a  (Jood  Re- 
vival— A  Revival  and  its  Two  Parts— Elements  of  a  Re- 
vival—  Consciousness  of  a  Need  of  Revival  —  Active 
Effort — Presence  and  Co-operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit — 
A  Free  and  Full  Provision — Consistent  Lives  of  those  pro- 
moting a  Revival — People  must  be  awakened  —  The 
Slumbering  Consciences  of  Sinners  must  be  aroused — 
Easier  to  reach  Sinners  in  a  Revival  than  at  other  Times — 
Armiuianism  in  a  Revival — Does  not  need  to  drop  any 
of  her  Doctrines — Need  not  repress  any  Emotion — In- 
stance of  Repressed  Emotion  and  the  Ending  of  a  Re- 
vival— Arminianism  enforces  her  Doctrine  with  a  Single 
Purpose — Armiuianism  can  commence  her  Revival  at 
any  Point  in  the  Round  of  Doctrine — All  Revivals  must 
be  can  ied  on  under  the  Teaching  of  a  Free  Salvation — 
It  is  not  Possible  to  have  a  Successful  Revival  and 
preach  the  Doctrines  of  Predestination  —  President 
Charles  G.  Finney — D.  L.  Moody— A  Presbyterian  Re- 
vivalist. 

The  friends  and  advocates  of  Arminianism 
claim  that  it  is  a  strong  power,  a  living  force, 
adapted  to  meet  the  wants  of  the  hungry,  sin-sick 
souls  of  dying  men,  and  bring  them  into  life  and 
happiness.  It  is  the  great  revival  form  of  doctrine, 
free  from  all  objectionable  elements,  and  which 
takes  hold  of   sinners,  and,  by   the    Holy  Spirit's 

209 


210  ARMINIANISM  IX  HISTORY. 

power,  leads  to  true  enlightenment  and  aeeurance  of 
salvation.  It  has  this  power  because  of  iulierent 
characters.  It  produces  no  revolt  from  itself, 
though  it  leads  to  revolt  from  sin.  It  is  a  natural, 
consistent,  harmonious,  symmetrical,  and  easily-un- 
derstood presentation  to  the  mind  of  the  sinner  of 
his  natural  state,  "dead  in  trespasses  and  sin,"  and 
shows  how  he  may  turn  to  the  Sou  of  God,  who 
died  on  the  cross  for  the  possible  salvation  of  the 
sinner,  and  become  certain  that,  having  godly  sor- 
row and  confession  of  sin  to  CJod,  he  may  by  faith 
appropriate  the  merit  of  Christ's  sacrifice  to  him- 
self, and  his  sins  be  fully  and  freely  pardoned.  It 
satisfies  the  seeker  after  light  and  "pardon  as  no 
other  system.  It  discovers  the  ennobling  elements 
in  God's  scheme  of  salvation. 

The  revival  of  religion  has  two  parts  to  its 
meaning:  1.  It  refers  to  a  renewal  of  interest  in 
the  matters  of  religion  on  the  part  of  persons  who 
already  know  of  and  enjoy  a  degree  of  light  and 
knowledge.  2.  It  refers  to  the  awakening  of  sin- 
ners to  a  consciousness  of  their  lost  estate  in  sin, 
and  their  earnest  inquiry  for  the  way  of  light  and 
pardon,  and  tlieir  entrance  into  that  state  of  blessed 
enjoyment  and  assurance.  Whenever  there  is  a 
rousing  of  the  Church  from  spiritual  slumber  and 
the  quickening  of  the  life  of  believers  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  there  is  a  corresjxmding  awakening  and  con- 
version of  sinners. 

There  are  certain  well-<lefined  elements  that  must 


A  RMINIA  NISM  A  ND  RE  VI VA  LS.  211 

enter  into  a  genuine  revival,    and    without  which 
there  can  be  no  permanent  reform. 

1.  There  nnist  be  among  those  connected  with 
a  revival  movement  a  consciousness  that  all  men 
are  by  nature  sinners,  that  the  bite  of  the  serpent 
has  infected  all  mankind  with  a  tainted  nature,  and 
that  those  who  are  not  now  renewed  by  Divine  grace 
and  pardoned  are  actual  sinners.  Until  there  is 
the  deep  consciousness  of  sin,  and  a  corresponding 
realization  of  tlie  siui'ulness  of  sin,  tliere  will  be 
but  little  or  no  turning  to  God. 

2.  There  must  be  an  active  effort  of  the  renewed 
souls  to  urge  upon  the  unrenewed  the  importance  of 
turning  to  (rod  through  Jesus  Christ  for  pardon 
and  renewal.  By  this  activity  of  already  renewed 
souls  there  will  be  a  sensible  influence  exerted  upon 
the  souls  of  the  unrenewed  to  lead  them  to  serious 
consideration  of  their  state.  By  this  individual 
influence  minds  destitute  of  God's  favor  are  led  to 
solemn  thought,  a  consideration  of  the  importance 
of  the  soul's  salvation,  and  the  danger  of  delay. 
A  revival  never  takes  on  its  best  and  strongest 
character  until  there  is  this  individual  effort. 

3.  There  needs  to  be  the  presence  and  co-opera- 
tion of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  Jesus  promised  to 
the  Apostolic  Church,  and  through  them  to  all  ages 
of  the  (Church,  to  go  with  them  and  convict  of  sin 
and  a  judgment  to  come,  and  re-enforce  human 
agencies.  The  Holy  Spirit  goes  before  the  human 
word  in  preaching,  exhortation,  warning,  or  counsel, 


\ 


212  ARMINIAXISM  IN  HISTORY. 

and  then  it  follows  with  its  silent  but  all-powerful 
influence. 

4.  There  must  bethe  preaching  to,  and  teaching 
of,  sinners  that  Jesus  Christ  has  made  a  full  atone- 
ment for  the  sins  of  our  first  parents,  and  for  all 
sins  of  all  generations  of  men.  The  sinner  must  be 
made  to  feel  that  the  atonement  has  been  made  for 
him  in  person.  He  must  look  upon  it  as  an  indi- 
vidual and  not  a  collective  atonement.  God  does 
not  save  men  in  masses  but  singly.  There  is  a 
universal  atonement,  and  not  a  limited  one.  It 
must  be  made  possible  for  all  the  world  to  be  saved 
through  the  blood  of  Jesus,  and  not  one  in  ten. 
This  is  one  of  the  most  important  thitigs  connected 
with  a  great  revival.  Men  must  be  led  to  feel  a 
personal  necessity,  and  that  for  all  men  there  is  a 
personal  opportunity.  As  long  as  men  have  a  fear 
that  it  is  not  possible  for  them  to  be  saved,  because 
God  has  failed  to  make  provision  for  them,  they 
will  not  be  inclined  to  seek  Christ  and  live. 

5.  There  must  be  consistent  lives  on  the  part  of 
those  who  promote  revivals,  to  back  up  the  precepts 
taught  and  illustrate  what  Divine  grace  can  do  by 
what  it  has  done.  God  will  not  work  through  de- 
filed agents.  He  will  unmask  the  deceitful  and 
unholy,  who  pretend  to  work  for  him,  and  show 
the  hoUowness  of  their  lives.  Even  the  sinners  who 
want  to  turn  to  God  and  "seek  salvation,"  detect 
the  evil  in  human  lives,  and  allow  them  to  be  stum- 
bling-blocks and  hindrances  to  their  salvation. 


ARMINIANISM  AND  BEVIVALS.  2l3 

6.  There  must  come  into  the  hearts  and  minds 
of  the  community,  and  especially  of  those  who  are 
awakened,  the  consciousness  that  the  revival  is  the 
work  of  God,  and  that  men  are  only  agents  in  the 
hands  of  God  for  accomplishing  what  he  pur- 
poses. The  work  of  God,  as  distinguished  from  the 
work  of  man,  is  really  and  truly  of  the  highest  char- 
acter. 

7.  There  must  be  an  effort  to  rouse  the  slum- 
bering conscience  of  dying  sinners,  that  they  may 
see  how  dangerous  their  state  without  salvation, 
and  how  by  delay  they  peril  the  highest  interests  of 
their  immortal  souls  for  all  eternity.  The  means 
employed  must  be  earnest  prayer,  wafted  heaven- 
ward on  wings  of  a  strong  faith  ;  holy  song,  full  of 
awakening  sentiments  and  convicting  thought,  sent 
forth  with  notes  of  sweetest  cadence  ;  exhortations 
individually  and  in  the  congregation,  breathing 
the  fullness  of  redeeming  love,  with  human  sym- 
]);ithy  and  affection  ;  preaching  that  sets  forth  strong 
doctrine  in  clear-cut  words,  terse  sentences,  and 
clearly  understood  thoughts,  with  appeals,  warn- 
ings, entreaties  and  persuasions  of  the  sinner  to 
turn  to  Christ  for  pai'don  immediately. 

When  a  revival  of  religion  is  in  full  blast,  and 
the  hearts  of  believers  are  all  alive  to  the  impor- 
tance of  the  work,  and  on  fire  with  holy  zeal,  it 
does  not  seem  nearly  so  hard  for  a  soul  to  come  to 
Jesus  and  be  pardoned  and  renewed  as  when  the 
Church  is  cold,  the  revival  fii'es  gone  out,  and  extra 


214  A  RMINIANISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

services  are  closed.  This  is  uot  strange,  for  God 
speaks  of  set  times  to  favor  Zion.  The  spirit  of 
faith  is  stronger  sometimes  than  at  others.  The 
iitinosphere  is  sometimes  surcharged  with  feeling, 
emotion,  and  concern.  The  spirit  of  consecration  is 
more  general  in  the  Church.  Seize  these  times  of 
extraordinary  feeling  for  the  salvation  of  souls,  and 
multitudes  may  find  pardon,  and  experience  redeem- 
ing love. 

How  does  Arrainianism  enter  such  a  revival 
condition  and  time?  What  advantages  has  Armin- 
ianism  over  other  systems  of  ])elief  in  a  revival ''. 
These  questions  are  answei-ed  quite  readily  : 

1.  Arminianism  does  not  need  to  drop  any  of 
her  docti'ines  regarding  God  in  his  relation  to  man  ; 
or  regarding  man  in  relation  to  God  or  liis  fellows; 
or  regarding  man's  necessity  for  salvation,  or  the 
possibility  of  salvation  being  provided  for  all  men  ; 
or  regarding  the  instantaneous  and  conscious  knowl- 
edge of  sins  forgiven  ;  or  regarding  justification, 
regeneration,  and  entire  sauctification.  Arminian- 
ism holds  all  of  these  in  theii'  Biblical,  natural,  and 
logical  order,  aud  perfectly  in  iuirmony  with  the 
conditions  under  which  man  is  found  to  exist.  Ar- 
minianism does  not  need  to  repress  any  of  the 
emotions  of  the  sinner  when  his  sorrow  crushes  him 
to  the  earth  and  pictures  before  him  the  awful  re- 
alities of  damned  spirits,  nor  hold  him  back  when 
the  light  of  love  and  the  voice  of  pardon  enters 
the    soul,   and    he   rises   a   new  creature    in    Jesus 


A  R  MINI  A  NISM  AND  RE  VI VA  LS.  215 

Christ,  and  forcibly  says:  "Hallelujah!  I'm 
saved;  my  sins  are  all  forgiven  ;  I'm  free  !"  With 
that  rejoicing  soul,  just  born  into  the  kingdom,  Ar- 
miniauism  rejoices  also,  and  praises  (lod  in  ecsta- 
sies of  the  redemption. 

We  know  of  a  little  Methodist  church  in  a  college 
town  of  another  church.  A  revival  was  in  pro- 
gress in  the  church.  Some  citizens  were  con- 
verted, and  some  students  attending  the  college 
were  attracted  to  the  meetings,  and,  becoming 
awakened,  found  pardon  at  the  Methodist  altar. 
The  work  spread,  and  two  or  three  meetings  were 
held  in  the  college  chapel,  which  was  used  as  a 
church  for  that  denomination.  God's  jjresence  was 
felt,  and  one  or  two  persons  became  greatly  blessed. 
One  of  these  arose  and  began  to  tell  of  his  experi- 
ence, and  praised  God  for  what  he  had  done  in  his 
soul,  and,  in  so  doing,  raised  his  voice  above  what 
was  esteemed  the  keynote  of  propriety.  The  ven- 
erable college  president  arose,  shaking  his  cane  over 
his  head,  and  cried  out:  "None  of  that;  none  of 
that  here.  We  will  not  have  fox-fire  in  this 
place."  The  Spirit  was  quenched.  The  anxiety 
among  his  students  subsided.  It  was  over  twenty- 
five  years  before  another  revival  visited  that  college 
and  its  church.  It  did  not  again  occur  until  one  of 
the  wild  Juniors  of  the  college  came  to  the  Meth- 
odist Church,  which  had  steadily  grown  during 
these  years,  and  was  converted,  and,  through  the 
burning  zeal  of   his  first   love,  the  firebrand  of  re- 


216  ARMINIANISM  IN  HISTORY. 

vival  was  carried  to  the  college,  and  a  glorious  blaze 
of  light  began  to  burst  forth. 

2.  Armiuianisni  has  a  peculiar  advantage  in 
that  she  preaches  and  enforces  the  single  doctrine 
that  all  men  are  sinners,  but  Christ  Jesus  died  to 
make  an  atonement  for  the  sins  of  all  the  world,  so 
that  it  is  possible  fur  all  to  be  saved.  8omehow 
the  human  heart  delights  in  the  thought  that  it  is 
not  left  out  of  the  promise.  "For  me,  Christ 
died,"  he  says,  and  repeats  with  a  fervor  born  of 
deep  desire:  "For  me  the  Savior  died."  Of  all 
conditions  the  most  undesirable  is  to  go  to  a  sorrow- 
ing and  sobbing  sinner,  and  tell  him  that  we  can't 
be  certain  that  it  is  possible  for  him  to*  be  saved. 
He  may  be  passed  by.  He  may  be  reprobated,  a 
predamned  lost  one.  In  all  the  history  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  Arminianism  has  never  been  forced  to 
utter,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  or  impliedly,  such 
a  sentence  of  despair.  But  hope,  blessed  hope,  is 
held  out  to  the  sinner.  "  Christ  died  to  save  you  " 
rings  out  in  glad  refrain,  and  touches  his  ears, 
and  soon  reverberates  through  his  whole  soul,  and 
he  lives. 

3.  Arminianism  is  able  to  commence  her  revival- 
work  at  any  point  of  doctrine.  One  revivalist  com- 
mences at  the  doctrine  of  depravity,  and  leads  up 
to  an  atonement  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  rousing  re- 
vivals attend  his  laboi-s.  Another  commences  with 
the  new  life  in  the  Church,  and  seeks  to  bring  its 
members  to   their  knees  in   a  consecration   of  all 


ARMINIANISM  AND  REVIVALS.  217 

to  God,  and  preparation  for  work.  He  seeks  to  re- 
ceive a  pentecostal  shower.  Then  he  leads  his 
forces  against  the  ranks  of  the  wicked,  and  hundreds 
fall  under  the  word  of  preaching,  exhortation,  per- 
sonal appeal,  singing  the  songs  of  Zion,  and  fervent 
prayer,  and  are  happily  converted  and  brought  into 
Christ's  fold.  Another  starts  in  at  the  point  of 
entire  sanctification,  and  follows  this  with  all  the 
persistency  of  a  conscientious  man  of  God,  and 
not  only  are  hundreds  of  believers  sanctified,  but 
as  many  sinners  are  justified.  Arminians  may 
start  from  any  point  in  their  doctrines,  and  go  out 
with  revival  power,  and  always  reach  the  same 
results — a  gracious  revival  and  many  souls  con- 
verted. 

Arminianism  is  the  only  successful  revival  doc- 
trinal system.  The  following  proposition  is  readily 
maintained  :  In  all  cases  of  a  revival  in  the  Church, 
where  success  attends,  Calvinists  are  compelled  to 
surrender  for  the  time  being  their  Calvinistic  doc- 
trines of  predestination  and  reprobation,  and  preach 
and  teach  practically  Arminianism,  or  the  provision 
of  salvation  for  all  men.  If  they  commence  to 
preach  that  a  certain  portion  of  the  race  are  pre- 
destinated to  salvation,  and  the  remainder  are  rep- 
robated to  eternal  loss  in  perdition,  the  inquiry  im- 
mediately arises  in  the  sinner's  mind,  "To  which 
class  do  I  belong?"  Since  it  is  impossible  to  tell, 
according  to  that  theory  or  system  of  theology  to 
which   he   belongs,  discouragement   fills   the  mind, 


218  ARMiyiAXISM  IX  HISTORY. 

and  dark  forebodiugs  and  dread  iiucertaiuty  fill  the 
soul. 

Let  us  refer  to  examples  to  substantiate  this 
})osition  : 

1.  President  Charles  (i.  Finney,  of  Oberlin, 
Ohio,  became  one  of  the  most  prominent  and  suc- 
cessful revivalists  of  the  Congregational  Church.  He 
published  a  book  of  "Lectures  on  Revivals  of  Re- 
ligion," which  may  be  read  by  the  young  or  old 
minister  with  great  profit.  So  far  as  I  can  find, 
from  beginning  to  end,  he  lays  aside  all  thoughts  or 
expressions  of  predestination,  and  preaches,  lectures 
and  teaches — not  in  so  many  words,  but  actually — 
the  soundest  doctrines  of  Arminian'ism  that  man 
ever  heard.  This  is  true  of  his  sermons  on  "Pre- 
vailing Prayer,"  "The  Prayer  of  Faith,"  "Means 
to  be  Used  with  Sinners,"  and  "How  to  Preach 
the  Gos})el."  In  his  sermon  on  "  How  to  Preach 
the  Gospel,"  Dr.  Finney  very  clearly  teaches  that 
in  a  revival  the  doctrines  of  predestination  can  not 
be  preached.  "The  gospel  should  be  preached  in 
those  proportions,"  says  Finney,  "that  the  whole 
gospel  may  be  brought  before  the  minds  of  the 
people,  and  produce  its  proper  influence.  If  too 
much  stress  is  laid  on  one  class  of  truths,  the  Chris- 
tian character  will  not  have  its  due  proportions. 
Its  symmetry  will  not  be  perfect.  If  that  class  of 
truths  be  almost  exclusively  dwelt  upon  that  re- 
quires great  exertion  of  intellect,  without  being 
brought  home  to  the  heart  and  conscience,  it  will 


A  R MI XI A  NISM  A  XB  BE  VI VALS.  219 

be  found  that  the  Church  will  be  indoctrinated  in 
those  views,  will  have  their  heads  filled  Avith  no- 
tions, but  will  not  be  awake  and  active  and  efficient 
in  the  promotion  of  religion.  .  .  .  When  I 
entered  the  ministry,  there  had  been  so  much  said 
about  the  doctrine  of  election  and  sovereignty,  that 
I  found  it  was  the  universal  hiding-place,  both  of 
sinners  and  of  the  Church,  that  they  could  not  do 
anything,  or  could  not  obey  the  gospel.  And 
wherever  I  went,  I  found  it  indispensable  to  de- 
molish these  refuges  of  lies.  And  a  revival  would 
in  no  way  be  produced  or  carried  on,  but  by  dwell- 
ing on  that  class  of  truths  which  hold  up  man's 
ability,  and  obligation,  and  responsibility.  This 
was  the  only  class  of  truths  that  would  bring  sin- 
ners to  submission."  (Finney's  Lectures,  p.  188.) 
•  2.  Mr.  D wight  L.  Moody  has  been  before  the 
Christian  world  for  years  as  a  revivalist.  Having 
heard  him  in  the  midst  of  his  meetings,  we  have 
never  once  heard  him  preach  any  other  than  the 
most  perfect  Arminianism  regarding  man's  ability 
to  be  saved,  and  the  universality  of  the  provis- 
ion of  atonement.  Nor  do  his  books  reveal  in  any 
sense  the  predestination  doctrine,  but  the  ability 
of  every  sinner  to  come  to  God  through  the  merits 
of  Jesus  Christ,  and  receive  pardon  by  the  gift  of 
the  Spirit  of  God.  His  preaching  of  this  full  and 
free  gospel  has  shaken  the  sandy  foundations  of 
thousands  of  sinners. 

3.  It  Avas  our  privilege  to  attend  some  of  the 


220  A  R  MINI  A  NISM  IN  HISTOR  Y. 

meetiQgs  of  a  promineat  Presbyterian  revivalist  in 
a  Presbyterian  Church,  and  hear  his  sermons.  He 
was  an  eloquent  preacher,  a  true  expositor  of  the 
Bible,  earnest  in  presenting  the  truth,  and  successful 
in  entreating  sinners  to  turn  from  their  sins  and  ac- 
cept Christ,  and  be  saved.  He  never  once  spoke 
of  divine  sovereignty,  and  the  decrees  of  God,  the 
effectual  call  or  predestination,  but  he  constantly  en- 
forced the  declaration  that  all  men  are  sinners, 
Christ  Jesus  died  to  save  sinners,  and  whosoever 
will  may  come  to  the  water  of  life  freely,  and  par- 
take to  their  soul's  salvation.  He  preached  to 
dying  men  a  free  and  full  gospel  to  all  men. 

In  closing  this  sketch  of  Arminianism  in  History, 
it  is  just  to  say  that  it  has  been  prepared  in  the 
spirit  of  kindly  inquiry,  backed  by  a  desire  to 
know  of  the  great  Arminian  controversy,  and  its 
struggle  to  bring  again  into  active  exercise  the  doc- 
trines that  prevailed  in  the  early  Church  to  near 
the  end  of  the  fifth  century.  This  is  far  from 
being  an  exhaustive  work.  It  is,  however,  a  con- 
nected and  true  account  of  one  of  the  world's 
greatest  theological  controversies.     May  it  do  good! 


APPENDIX. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  OF  ARMINIUS,  ARMINIANISM, 

AND  WRITINGS  FOR,  AGAINST,    AND 

EXPLANATORY  THEREOF. 

The  Wokks  ok  James  Arminius,  D.  D.,  translated 
from  the  Latin,  in  tliree  volumes,  b\'  James  Nicols  and 
Rev.  W.  R.  Bagnall,  A.  M.,  1853.  This  work  presents 
"all  the  theological  works  of  Arminius,  the  publication 
of  which  was  ever  sanction* d  by  himself  or  friends." 
The  tirst  volume  contains  his  five  masterly  orations  on 
great  theological  questions;  namely,  "The  Priesthood  of 
Christ,"  "The  Object  of  Theology,"  "  The  Author  and  the 
End  of  Theology,"  The  Certainty  of  Sacred  Theology," 
and  "On  Reconciling  Religious  Dissensions  among 
Christians  "  Here  is  found  Arminius's  "Declaration  of 
Sentiments,"  "Apology  against  Thirty-one  Defamatory 
Articles,"  and  nine  questions  exliibited  for  the  purpose 
of  obtaining  an  answer  fr  mi  each  of  the  professors  of 
Divinity,  and  the  replies  which  James  Arminius  gave  to 
them. 

The  second  volume  contains  seventy-nine  private 
disputations,  a  dissertation  on  the  true  and  genuine  sense 
of  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  a 
letter  to  Hippolytus  a  Collibus  on  thirty- nine  other  ar- 
ticles of  lesser  importance. 

The  third  volume  contains  an  ejastolary  discussion 
concerning  predestination,  between  James  Arminius, 
D.  D.,  and  Francis  Junius,  D.  D.,  examination  of  a  trea- 
tise concerning  the  order  and  mode  of  predestination 
and  the  amplitude  of  Divine  grace,  by  William  Perkins, 

15  221 


222  APPENDIX. 

a  theological  writer  of  England,  and  an  analysis  of  the 
ninth  chapter  of  Romans. 

In  the  Footsteps  of  Arminius,  a  Monograph,  by  Rev. 
William  F.  Warren,  D.  D.,  LL.  D.,  President  of  Boston 
University  ;  pp.  52.     Excellent  so  far  as  it  goes. 

FIlSTORY   OF  THli:  REFORMATION   OF  GeRHAKDT  BrANDT. 

translated  into  English  by  Chamberlayer;  London,  1720  ; 
four  volumes. 

Arminianism:  Article  in  McClintock  and  Strong's 
Cyclopaedia.  An  excellent  and  strong  article.  Also  ar- 
ticles in  the  Encyclopaedia  Britannica  and  Schaff's 
edition  of  Herzog.  Tliese  articles  are  only  satisfactory 
as  an  outline  of  the  life  and  labors  of  Arminius  and 
of  the  doctrines  taught.  In  general  they  are  quite  fair 
in  stating  the  present  thought  as  to  Arminianism  in  tlie 
Methodist  Churches,  but  do  not  give  any  view  as  to 
what  Arminianism  has  done  for  other  Churches  and 
beliefs.  The  student  will  find  it  very  necessary  to  make 
a  careful  search  elsewhere  to  iind  the  \\k\\  influence  of 
the  doctrines  of  Arminianism. 

Memoirs  of  Simon  Episcopus,  the  celebrated  pupil 
of  Arminius,  by  Frederick  Calder;  pp.  478.  This  is  a  su- 
perior work,  and  clearly  portrays  the  struggle  of  Ar- 
minianism in  the  Synod  of  Dort.  The  work  was  pub- 
lished by  Mason  and  Lane,  New  York  Methodist  Book 
Concern,  in  1837.  It  is  the  best  work  now  within  the 
reach  of  students  on  this  interesting  subject.  In  this 
work  there  is  a  clear  account  of  the  character  of  the 
gentle  Arminius,  of  the  scholarly  Uytenbogaert,  the  cul- 
tivated Hugo  Grotius,  and  of  the  great  statesman  Barne- 
veldt.  Here  is  an  epitome  of  the  sentiments  of  Go- 
marus  and  Arminius,  as  they  confronted  each  other.  It 
contains  the  Constitution  of  the  Dutch  Church,  Epis- 
copius's  Oration  in  the  University  of  Leyden,  the  dial- 


APPENDIX.  223 

lenge  to  the  members  of  the  Synod  of  Dort  to  debate 
on  the  questions  of  predestination,  the  Five  Articles  of 
Arminianism  that  controvert  the  Five  Points  of  Cal- 
vinism, Barneveldt  and  his  relation  to  Arminianism,  to- 
gether with  other  equally  important  matters. 

Arminius:  Article  by  Di-.  Wm.  F.  Warren,  in  the 
Methodist  Quarterly  Review  of  July,  1857.  This  is  an 
excellent  and  thoughtful  production,  and  carefully 
weighs  the  character  of  Arminianism,  and  compares  it 
with  the  Calvinism  of  the  times. 

Hagknbach's  History  of  Doctrines,  translated  by 
Dr.  Smith,  in  Sections  225-235,  gives  a  fair  statement  con- 
cerning Arminianism. 

Alzog's  Universal  Church  History  (Roman  Cath- 
olic), Vol.  Ill,  pp.  326-330,  has  a  few  pages  regarding  the 
controversies  in  Reformed  and  Lutheran  Churches,  in 
which  he  gives  only  a  part  of  the  great  struggle  between 
Arminianism  and  Calvinism.  The  article  furnishes 
food  for  thought.  It  is  profitable  to  know  what  a  party 
antagonistic  to  both  Arminianism  and  Calvinism  thinks 
of  the  controversy. 

Symbolism,  by  J.  A.  Moehlor,  D.  D.;  translated  from 
the  German  by  James  Burton  Robertson.  Two  volumes 
of  the  London  edition  are  put  in  one  of  the  American 
edition,  pp.  496-505.  Dr.  Moehler  was  a  Roman  Cath- 
olic writer,  and  at  times  was  not  inclined  to  give  full 
credit  to  what  he  chose  to  call  the  sects.  Upon  the 
whole,  what  he  says  is  worthy  of  consideration.  He 
speaks  wholly  of  the  doctrines  of  Arminius  as  held 
by  the  Methodists,  and  the  "  religious  state  of  England 
at  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century." 

Compendium  of  Christian  Theology,  by  Pope.  This 
able  English  Methodist  work  on  Systematic  Theology  is 


224  APPENDIX. 

a  monument  of  excellence  and  industry.  It  devotes 
many  pages  of  the  first  and  second  volumes  to  a  discus- 
sion of  Arminianism  and  Arminius.  He  makes  very 
judicious  comparisons  of  the  Arminianism  of  Method- 
ism of  the  close  of  the  nineteenth  century  with  the  Ar- 
minianism of  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century. 
Dr.  Pope  shows  the  shades  of  difference  between  Ar- 
minius and  Hugo  Grotius.  The  nice  distinctions  are 
preserved  between  the  various  doctois  of  the  Arminian 
faith  and  of  the  Roman  and  Presbyterian  teachers. 

Fletcher's  Checks  to  Antixomianism.  These  books, 
four  volumes,  are  the  work  of  Rev.  John  Fletcher, 
Vicar  of  Madeley,  one  of  ]Mr.  AVesley's  most  valued  fol- 
lowers. He  had  a  well-disciplined  mind,  an  acute  dis- 
cernment between  Scripture  truth  and. the  theories  of 
men,  a  ready  formulation  of  his  thoughts  into  sentences 
that  were  made  to  mean  just  what  he  intended  them  to 
mean.  Mr.  Fletcher's  writings  are  standards  in  the 
Methodist  Churches  throughout  the  world.  The  pas- 
sages especially  devoted  to  James  Arminius  and  Armin- 
ianism are  numerous,  and  are  best  found  by  the  General 
Index,  placed  in  the  fourth  volume.  Fletcher  gives  an 
excellent  reason  why  Arminianism  liecame  so  popular  in 
the  reigns  of  King  James  and  Charles  I,  in  iMigland. 

Thrological  In.stitutes,  by  Richard  Watson,  two 
volumes,  is  a  systematic  theology  co  structed  upon  the 
Arminian  doctrine  as  its  basis.  Richard  Watson  was  a 
follower  of  Mr.  Wesley,  of  a  cultured  mind,  a  clear  per- 
ception of  truth,  a  profound  devotion  to  God,  and  com- 
petent fully  to  discuss  the  most  abtruse  propositions. 
He  was  a  careful  and  accurate  studetit  of  theology,  was 
calm  in  manner,  of  extensive  reading,  and  great  devo- 
tion to  what  he  conceived  to  be  tiie  truth.  The  Insti- 
tutes have  for  years  been  a  standard  of  Melhoditt  doc- 


APPENDIX.  225 

trine,  and  have  been  put  into  the  hands  of  the  young 
preachers  as  a  text-book  on  doctrines. 

The  Life  of  James  Akminius  D.  D.,  written  in  Latin 
by  Casper  Brandt,  Remonstrant  minister,  Amsterdam, 
and  translated  by  John  Guthrie,  A.  M.,  is  a  valuable 
contribution  to  the  history  of  Arminianism.  It  was 
published  by  the  Book  Concern  of  the  Methodist  Epis- 
copal Church,  South.  The  introduction  to  this  work  by 
Dr.  Thomas  O.  Summers  is  an  excellent  balancing  of  the 
character  of  Arminius,  the  pure  doctrines  of  Arminian- 
ism, and  the  "  Semi-Pelagianism  in  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, and  Semi-Socinianism  in  the  Churches  of  New 
England." 

ARTICLES  IN  PERIODICALS. 

Arminian  Doctrine  op  Self-determination.  S.  C. 
Bruce.    Theological  Review,  Vol.  V,  p.  371. 

Arminian  View  of  the  Fall  and  Redemption.  D.  D. 
Whedon.    Methodist  Quarterly  Review,  Vol.  XXI,  p.  647. 

Arminianism  and  Calvinism.  Christian  Observer. 
Vol.  I,  p.  787. 

Arminianism  and  Grace.  J.  C.  Rankin.  Princeton 
Review,  Vol.  XXVIII,  p.  38. 

Princeton  Review  on  Arminianism.  Methodist 
Quarterly  Review,  Vol.  XVI,  p.  257. 

Controversy  on  Arminianism  in  the  Low  Countries. 
Methodist  Quarterly  Review,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  425-556. 

Difficulties  of  Arminianism.  S.  Comfort.  Ameri- 
can Methodist  Magazine,  Vol.  XXI,  p.  319. 

Historic  Arminianism.  Boston  Review,  Vol.  I, 
p.  287. 


22fi  APPENDIX. 

Inconsistencies  and  Errors  of  Arminianism.     South- 
ern Review,  New  Series,  Vol.  XXII,  p.  464. 

James  Arminius.   W.  F.  Warren.   Methodist  Review, 
Vol.  XVII,  p.  345. 

Arminius  and  Akminians  in  Holland.     Methodist 
Magazine,  Vol.  XXXVI,  p.  23. 

Arminius  and   Arminianism.     Christian   Examiner, 
Vol.  LXVIII,  p.  393. 


INDKX. 


Arminianism,  at  Synod  of  Dort,  8;  preached  on  Boston 
Common,  9;  taught  freedom  of  the  will,  11;  de- 
fined, 11;  erroneous  statements  concerning,  13; 
Third  Proposition,  111;  Fourth  Proposition,  113; 
Fifth  Proposition,  114;  not  killed  at  Synod  of  Dort, 
129 ;  in  England,  131 ;  in  its  Wesleyan  growth,  156 ; 
of  the  Friends,  200 ;  in  revivals,  209 ;  drops  no  doc- 
trine in  a  revival,  214;  Five  Articles,  65,  68. 

Angelica,  mother  of  Arminius,  15. 

Augustine  and  Augustinism,  8,  13,  95,  97. 

J^^milius,  15  ;  death,  16. 

Arminius,  James,  born,  15  ;  father  and  mother,  15  ;  their 
death,  15;  adopted  by  /Emilius,  15;  adopted  by 
Snellius,  16;  at  Marburg,  16;  journey  to  Oudewater, 
16 ;  walk  to  Marburg,  16 ;  at  Rotterdam  with  Peter 
Bertius,  17;  at  University  of  Leyden,  17;  teachers, 
17;  adopted  by  the  merchants  of  Amsterdam,  17; 
at  Geneva,  18;  pupil  of  Beza,  18;  met  Uytenbogaert, 
18 ;  lecturing  at  Geneva,  19 ;  attacked  Aristotle,  19 ; 
at  Basle,  19;  declined  the  doctorate,  19;  return  to 
Geneva,  19 ;  at  Padua,  19  ;  at  Rome,  20;  called  to 
Amsterdam,  20;  denied  having  favored  Rome,  20; 
ordained,  20;  style  of  preaching,  21 ;  how  affected 
by  his  visit  to  Rome,  21 ;  how  he  came  to  antagonize 
Calvinism,  22;  employed  to  controvert  Koornhert'a 
book,  24  ;  effect  upon  himself,  24  ;  lecture  on  Romans 
ix,  25 ;  effect  of  his  sermons,  25 ;  mental  and  spirit- 
ual exercises,  25 ;  marriage  to  Elizabeth  Real,  25 ; 
mode  of  interpreting  "  For  we  know  that  the  law  is 
spiritual,"  26;  various  false  charges  against  him,  27 ; 

227 


228  INDEX. 

before  the  ministers  of  Amsterdam,  28  ;  Peter  Plau- 
cius  against  him,  28  ;  Arminius's  defense,  29 ;  cleared, 
29;  Lydius  and  Uytenbogaert  attempt  harmony,  29; 
senators  of  Amsterdam  hear  Arminius,  29;  Brandt's 
account,  30;  vindicated,  and  free  to  preach,  31;  a 
professor  at  Leyden,  33  ;  released  at  Amsterdam,  33 ; 
oppressed  by  Calvinist  ministers,  33  ;  calm  amid  the 
opposition,  35;  made  a  doctor  and  invested  with  the 
office,  36;  examination,  36;  disputation,  36;  his  pur- 
pose as  to  his  work,  37;  three  orations,  37;  his  ene- 
mies take  advantage  of  his  presence  at  a  discussion, 
38;  besieged  with  the  question  of  predestination, 
39;  falsely  called  a  Pelagian,  39;  his  charge  against 
Beza  and  Gomarus,  40  ;  made  rector  of  Leyden  Uni- 
versity, 40 ;  demonstrated  belief  in  Providence,  42 ; 
ready  for  debate,  43;  always  advocated  salvation  free 
for  all  men,  43;  lectures  on  Jonah  and  Malachi,  44; 
resigned  the  rectorship,  44  ;  oration  on  religious  dis- 
sension, 44;  prompt  compliance  with  the  Gorcum 
Synod,  47;  interpretations  of  the  confession,  47;  en- 
dured affliction,  48;  visited  Hippolytus,  49;  drew  up 
a  statement  of  his  doctrines,  49 ;  reply  to  Borrius, 
49;  declaration  of  sentiments,  49;  death,  50;  charac- 
ter, 50  ;  motto,  50;  words  at  The  Hague,  103;  reasons 
for  opposing  predestination,  103-109. 

Amsterdam,  burgomeisters  adopt  Arminius,  18;  they 
called  Arminius  from  Geneva,  20 ;  hear  charges 
against  Arminius,  29  ;  decision  of  the  senators,  31. 

Assembly  of  West  Holland  and  Friesland  voted  against 
Arminianism,  70  ;  Schaff's  remarks,  70. 

Alva,  53,  145;  the  butcher,  146;  angrj',  147;  Alva's  tax, 
148 ;  threatened  to  hang  eighteen  men  of  Brussels, 
148 ;  States  ordered  to  assemble  at  The  Hague,  but 
meet  at  Dort,  149. 

Amyraut,  127 ;  professor  of  Theology  at  Bourgueil,  127 ; 
difference  between  objective  and  subjective  grace,  128. 


INDEX.  229 

Articles  of  religion  of  Church  of    England   not  Armin- 

ian,  131. 
Age  of  theological  revolt,  136. 
Assembly  of  Holland  and  William  unite,  150. 
Albinus,  152. 
Anne,  the  Queen,  157. 
Arminian  Magazine,  165. 

Barneveldt,  John,  34 ;  Advocate-General  of  Holland, 
53;  advocated  Arminianism,  64;  executed,  71. 

Borrius,  Adrian,  49. 

Baxterianism,  114. 

Boerhave,  152. 

Barclay's  Apology,  204;  rejected  Calvinism,  203;  true 
Church  Divinity,  205. 

Bertius,  Peter,  36. 

Burgomeister  Benning,  favored  Episcopius,  53. 

Bohler,  Peter,  130. 

Baro,  Peter,  132 ;  professor  at  Cambridge,  132. 

Beggars  of  the  Sea,  148. 

Brill,  149. 

Blois,  William  de,  149. 

Calvinism,   dominant  in    Holland,   8;    questioned   the 

right  of  any  to  doubt,  9;    Geneva,  9;  Scotland,  9; 

England,  9;  New  England,  9;  necessitated  will,  11; 

modification  in  Calvinism,  101. 
Calvin,  John,  united  Augustinism  and  Gottschalkiera, 

98;  his  Institutes,  13,  99;  genius  of  Calvin,  101. 
College  in  Amsterdam,  83. 
ColHbus,  48. 
Copleston's  words,  115. 
Cox,  136. 
Crucius,  36. 

Counter- remonstrants,  65. 
Curcellaeus,  born,  75;    entered  the  Genevese  Stoa,    75; 

student  of  Be^a,  75 ;  letter  of  commendation  from 


230  INDEX. 

Geneva,  76;  travels,  7(5;  ordained,  77;  pastor  at 
Fontainebleau,  77 ;  revolt  from  Calvinism,  77 ;  pas- 
tor at  Amiens,  77  ;  refused  tlie  Canons  of  Dort,  77  ; 
pastor  at  Verres,  78  ;  at  Amsterdam,  78 ;  Poelenburg's 
estimate  of  Curcelheus,  78;  successor  of  Episcopiusas 
professor  of  Divinity  at  Amsterdam,  81 ;  death, 
words  of  triumph,  82,  86. 

Charles  V,  142;  abdicated,  143. 

Campbell's  Puritan  in  Holland,  143. 

Chartered  cities,  145. 

Council  of  Troubles,  1 46. 

Council  of  Blood,  146. 

Court  of  St.  Cloud,  146. 

Coli^ny  slain,  150. 

Calvinistic  Methodists  in  three  sects,  175. 

Clarke,  Dr.  Adam,  an  Arminian  writer,  193. 

Conclusions,  197. 

Charles  II  and  Barclay's  Apology,  206. 

Deputies    of    Holland    arranging    for   a  preliminary 

Synod,  48. 
Doctrines  rejected  by  Arminius,  68,  69. 
Dutch  Republic,  142. 
Drusus,  152. 

Episcopius,  Simon,  52  ;  professor  of  Theology  at  Leyden, 
52;  his  name  Bisschop,  53;  pupil  of  Beckemanus, 
54 ;  adopted  and  educated  by  the  Senate  of  Amster- 
dam, 54 ;  placed  in  University  of  Leyden,  54 ;  made 
Master  of  Arts,  54 ;  Theological  studies  under  Ar- 
minius, 54 ;  preached  before  the  Senate  of  Amster- 
dam, 54;  called  "  The  Dutch  Cicero,"  55;  appointed 
court  preacher,  55 ;  relations  with  Barneveldt,  55 ; 
Institutes,  83 ;  principles  upon  which  he  lectured, 
83,  86. 

England's  condition  as  seen  by  Hallam,  134. 

English  divines  favorable  to  Arminians,  137. 


INDEX.  231 

Elizabeth,  147. 

Evans,  Thomas,  account  of  the  Friends'  doctrine,  20G. 

Elements  of  a  revival,  211. 

Five  Points  and  Five  Articles,  ()4 ;  laid  before  the  As- 
sembly of  Representatives,  64 ;  written  by  Uyten- 
bogaert,  64. 

Fletcher's  estimate  of  Bishop  Laud,  Vi^;  Fletcher,  181; 
educated,  182;  a  soldier,  182;  in  England  and  with 
Methodist  societies,  182;  a  priest,  182;  rector,  182; 
Benson's  description  of  him,  182  ;  as  a  controversial- 
ist, 183;  statement  of  Arminianism,  183;  answer  to 
Toplady,  184 ;  statement  as  to  how  Arminianism  es- 
teems grace  and  justice,  186;  essays  on  Bible  Calvin- 
ism and  Bible  Arminianism,  187;  Fletcher's  argu- 
ment, 188. 

Fisk's  Calvinistic  controversy,  195 ;  unmasking  the 
"New  Divinity,"  197. 

Fox,  founder  of  the  Friends,  201 ;  an  Arminian,  201. 

Friends,  or  Quakers,  201 ;  their  new  creed,  207. 

Finney,  Rev.  Charles  G.,  in  a  revival,  218. 

Grotius,  Hugo,  50;  scholarship,  53;  birth,  60;  at  Uni- 
versity of  Leyden,  60 ;  his  Latin  poem  to  Henry  IV 
of  France,  60  ;  visit  to  Paris,  60 ;  a  lawyer,  60 ;  a  lit- 
terateur, 60;  pensioner  of  Rotterdam,  61 ;  with  Cas- 
aubon  in  England,  61 ;  embraced  Arminianism,  61  ; 
for  toleration,  61;  eloquent,  62;  arrested,  placed  in 
Loewenstein,  62;  wife  helped  him  to  escape,  63; 
fled  to  France,  63  ;  died  at  Rostock,  63,  87. 

Godfrey,  76. 

Guilds  of  Netherlands,  144. 

Gerard,  the  assassin  of  William  of  Orange,  153. 

Gomarus,  33 ;  oration  in  honor  of  Junius,  33 ;  opposi- 
tion to  Arminius,  34;  examined  Arminius,  36;  un- 
civil towards  Arminius,  38 ;  seen  by  a  committee  at 
Leyden,  47. 


232  INDEX. 

Gonda,  discussion,  45. 

Grevinchovius,  36. 

Gottschalk,  13,  97 ;  his  system,  98 ;  theory  of  Gottscbalk 

and  Augustine  united  by  Calvin,  98. 
Geneva  school,  18. 
Gorcum  Synod,  46,  47. 
Greek  Fathers,  effect  when  read  in  England,  137. 

Hume's  statement  of  the  Arminian  controversy,  125. 

Hallam's  estimate  of  England's  Constitution,  134. 

Holland,  141 ;  rising  hope,  151. 

Haarlem  and  its  butchery,  151. 

Howell  Harris,  173. 

Huntingdon,  Countess  of,  174. 

Hodge's  erroneous  statements,  14 ;  sermons,  92, 

Hominius,  36,  41. 

Helmichius,  39.   . 

Hoorn,  45. 

Halsberg,  confident  of  Arminius,  47. 

Hippolytus  a  Collibus,  48;  received  Arminius,  49. 

Hagenbach's  words,  86. 

Historical  review  of  theological  conditions,  94. 

Hoard,  Samuel,  rector  of  Moreton  College,  133. 

•'  Ice  Bird,"  92. 

Junius,  Francis,  death,  32. 

Jesuits,  free-will  advocates,  126. 

Jansenists,  predestination  advocates,  126. 

Jewell,  138. 

James  I  of  England,  control  of  Synod  of  Dort,  136. 

KooRNHERT,  RicHARD,  22 ;  Secretary  of  State  of  Holland, 
23 ;  his  book,  23 ;  whom  he  attacked,  24 ;  Lydius  ap- 
pointed to  refute  the  book,  24. 

Kuchlinas,  39, 

Kurtz's  misunderstanding  of  Arminianism,  179. 


INDEX.  233 

Luther,  74,  98  ;  controversy  with  Erasmus  changed  his 
belief  in  predestination,  116. 

LeClerc,  84. 

Limborch,  84,  86;  life  and  career,  120;  student  at 
Utrecht,  121;  pastor  at  Gonda,  121;  professor  of 
Divinity,  121;  Staudlein's  estimate,  121;  Divinity, 
123;  a  commentator,  122  ;  Kitto's  estimate,  122;  his 
Theologia  Christiana,  123;  Book  of  Limborch'a  dis- 
tinction between  Arminianism  and  Calvinism,  123. 

Lutherans  tended  to  Arminianism,  128, 

Lydius,  29. 

Lausbergius,  39. 

Leyden  University  astir  over  Arminius,  41. 

Lambeth  Articles,  object,  137;  Whitgift's  approval,  137  ; 
Lord  Burleigh's  disapproval,  137. 

Louis  of  Nassau,  149 ;  at  Mons,  149. 

Leyden  taken  by  Orange,  151;  university  founded,  152. 

Lipsius,  152. 

Leyden  and  Protestants  from  France,  152. 

Laud  and  Juxon,  133 ;  Fletcher's  estimate  of  Laud,  134. 

Low  countries,  141. 

Medenblick,  45. 

Mosheim's  remarks  on  Arminianism,  71. 

Melanchthon,  74,  98;  his  Loci  Theologici,  IKi. 

Moravians,  or  Zinzendorfians,  129. 

Mennonites,  129 ;  antedated  Arminius,  130. 

Menno  Simons,  130. 

Margaret  of  Parma,  14-5. 

Marck,  William  de  la,  at  Brill,  149. 

Massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew's  Day,  150. 

Middleburgh,  victory  at,  151. 

Moody,  D.  L.,  in  a  revival,  219. 

National  Synod,  question  of,  44;  demand  for,  45; 
ordered,  45;  work,  45;  questions  that  aros^^,  46;  Re- 
formed pastors  opposed  revision,  46  ;  Arminius  and 


234  INDEX. 

I^ytetibogaert   favored   reA'ision,   46;    Synodical    let- 
ters, 47. 

Naeranus  and  his  wife,  88. 

Nitschmann,  1.30. 

Nowell,  i:'.S. 

Netherlands,  141. 

Nonjuring  Presbyterians,  157. 

Original  Sin,  12. 

Plaucius,  2n. 

Pestilence  in  Holland,  32. 

Poelenburg's  funeral  oration,  78;  a  professor,  84. 

Persecutions  at  Leyden,  89. 

Persons  making  a  cloak  of  Armlnianism,  112. 

Pelagianism  founded  no  societies,  95;  contact  with  Ar- 
minianism,  113. 

Pelagius  the  IVIonk  of  Wales,  96 ;  at  Hippo,  97. 

Pope's  statements,  96  ;  Systematic  Theology,  192. 

Predestinarianism  leading  to  Pantheism,  100;  predesti- 
nation, first  form,  10.3-109;  second  form,  109. 

Pre  Wesleyan  Arminianism  of  the  Continent,  126. 

Playfere,  John,  132;  professor  at  Cambridge,  132;  Bak- 
er's remarks  about  him,  132. 

Peter  Paaw,  152. 

Puritanism  strong  in  the  Netherlands,  133. 

Protest  of  a  Caraeronian  against  Arminianism,  157. 

Political  home  of  Arminianism,  139. 

Puritanism  and  Arminianism,  140;  the  two  con- 
trasted, 140. 

Philip  II,  142;  ruler  of  the  Netherlands,  143;  cruel,  145. 

Prince  of  Conde,  147. 

Penn  and  Pennington,  202. 

Ramu.s,  19. 

Remonstrants  and  Counter  Remonstrants,  65. 

Revolt  of  Arminius  and  Episcopius,  74. 


INDEX.  2.% 

Remonstrants'  College  at  Amsterdam,  83;  professors,  84. 

Ryckewart,  88. 

Requesens,  Louis  de,  in  place  of  Alva,  151. 

Raymond's  Systematic  Theology,  194. 

Revivals  and  Arminianism,  209 ;  a  revival  and  its  two 
parts,  210;  elements  of  a  revival,  211;  revival  in  a 
college  town,  215 ;  Oalvinists  in  a  revival  surrender 
their  peculiar  doctrine,  217. 

Synod  of  Dokt,  8-12. 

Second  class  of  Arminian  writers,  73. 

Schleiermacher's  views  of  Arminianism,  85. 

Synod  of  South  Holland,  46. 

Socinus  in  Poland,  95. 

Sovereignty  of  God  absolute,  100;  unconditional,  100. 

Scholars  of  Arminianism,  179. 

Sublapsarianism,  111. 

Socinianism,  111,  112. 

Supralapsarianism,  114. 

Sacramental  controversy,  effect  upon  Arminianism,  128. 

Sandys,  136. 

States  Assemblies  and  Alva's  tax,  148. 

St.  Bartholomew's  Day,  150. 

Separation  between  Wesley  and  Whitefield,  167. 

Shirley,  174. 

Trelcatius,  47. 

The  Hague,  preliminary  Synod,  48;  Arminius  presented 

a  Declaration  of   Sentiments  to  the  Synod  of   The 

Hague,  49. 
Treatment  of  banished  preachers,  87. 
Tlieological  revolt,  age  of,  136. 
Theological  teaching  when  John  Wesley  came,  138. 
Title  of  London  Church  property,  167. 
Toplady,  175. 
Trevecca,  175. 


236  INDEX. 

Universalism,  10;  no  human  will  in  salvation,  10. 

Unitas  Fratrum,  129. 

United  Netherlands,  142. 

Uytenbogaert,  19,  29;  intercedes  for  Arminius,  33,  34  ; 
preacher  at  The  Hague,  and  chaplain  to  Prince 
Maurice, '52;  defended  Arrainianism,  56 ;  leader  of 
the  Remonstrants,  56;  born  in  Utrecht,  56;  pastor 
at  Utrecht,  56 ;  personal  appearance,  57  ;  opposed 
compulsory  support  of  symbols,  57 ;  his  demand  of 
the  State,  57;  his  influence,  57;  the  State  invoked 
against  him,  58;  sought  for  toleration,  58;  his  col- 
loquy at  The  Hague,  58 ;  president  of  the  Synod  of 
Wallevick,  59 ;  arrested  at  Antwerp  and  banished  to 
Rouen,  59;  secret  return,  59;  part  of  his  goods  re- 
stored, 59;  liberties  curtailed,  59;  death,  59 ;  author 
of  the  Five  Articles,  64. 

Utrecht  refused  Alva's  tax,  148. 

Van  Cattenburgh,  85. 

Van  Oosterzee  and  Arminianism,  86. 

Voetius,  Gysburtius,  erroneous  teachings,  124 ;  a  stu- 
dent at  Leyden,  124 ;  character,  124. 

Vorstius,  Conrad,  born,  125;  educated,  125;  professor 
at  Steinfurt,  125 ;  expelled  by  order  of  James  I  of 
England,  125. 

Van  der  Does,  152. 

Vossius,  152. 

Will,  necessitated,  11;  freedom  of  will,  11. 

Wettstein,  85. 

Writers,  modern,  regarding  Arminianism,  85. 

Winer  and  Arminianism,  86. 

Warren,  Dr.  W.  F.,  statement,  102. 

Words  of  Arminius,  103. 

Watson,  an  Arminian  writer,  114;  theology  constructed 

on  the  Arminian  basis,  189. 
Wesley  and  Arminianism,  119,  158. 


INDEX.  237 

William  of  Orange,  146 ;  The  Silent,  146 ;  made  Stadt- 
holder,  147;  defeated,  147;  fled  to  France,  147;  be- 
lieved himself  a  man  of  destiny,  150;  assassi- 
nated, 153. 

Wesleyan  Arminianism  a  Reformation,  158. 

Wesley's  letter  to  his  mother,  159;  bis  mother's  reply, 
159  ;  Mrs.  Wesley's  letter  from  Wroote,  160 ;  sermon 
on  "  Free  Grace,"  161 ;  eight  reasons  for  antagoniz- 
ing predestination,  161-163;  Wesley's  Dialogue,  163; 
four  reasons  against  predestination,  163-164;  in 
the  light,  164  ;  a  logician  and  organizer,  168  ;  letter  to 
Wbitefield,  169,  172;  letter  of  1747  to  Wbitefield  re- 
garding a  union  of  Methodist  societies,  176. 

Wbitefield,  a  friend  of  Wesley,  167;  an  impulsive  man, 
168;  orator,  168;  visit  to  America,  169;  letter  to 
Wesley,  169  ;  second  voyage  to  America,  170  ;  letter 
from  Savannah,  170;  letter  from  Lopen,  170;  histor- 
ical fact,  letter  to  Hutton,  171 ;  imploring  Wesley 
not  to  speak  against  election,  171;  letters  to  Wesley 
from  South  Carolina,  172 ;  letter  from  Boston,  172 ; 
return  to  England,  177 ;  not  well  received  in  Scot- 
land, 177. 

Welsh  Calvinistic  Methodists,  174. 

Whedon  and  the  Review,  194;  freedom  of  the  will  on 
an  Arminian  basis,  195. 

Zakabella,  19 
Zwingli,  74,  99. 
Zinzendorf,  129. 


X^  x|x  xf X  xjx  x|y  x|x  xfx  x'j'A  xV  xV  -vV  xjx  xjx  xjx  x|x  kV  x|x  xf x  '^t>^.'^ 

-Jj  @\#  (§\#  (§\^  (§\^  ®\©  ®\p)  <§\S j$- 


THE  WITNESS   OF   THE   WORLD  TO  CHRIST. 

By  REV.  W.  A.  MATHEWS,  M.  A. 

121110.     Cloth.    240  pages go  cents. 

"We  all,  -whether  students  of  natural  or  revealed  truth, 
are  groping  our  onward  way  to  perfect  light,  and  whatso- 
ever doth  make  manifest  aught  that  to  either  is  yet  dark, 
is  light  that  we  well  ma}'  hail,  even  if  its  rays  penetrate  to 
us  from  without  the  chamber  of  our  own  special  study." 

"  This  is  a  valuable  and  suggestive  work  by  a  minister  of  the 
Church  of  England.  It  is  well  adapted  to  meet  some  current  forms 
of  skepticism,  and  to  strengthen  faith  in  the  divine  character  of  the 
Christian  religion.  .  .  .  He  maintains  that  Christianity  is  not 
merely  one  of  the  religions  of  the  world,  but  a  new  life." — Christian 
Guardian. 


THE    MASTER    SOWER. 

By  REV.  F.  S.  DAVIS,  A.  M. 

l2ino.     Cloth.     196  pages, 75  cents. 

"The  principles  of  the  Christian  religion  are  strikingly 
like  principles  of  germation  and  growth  in  material  nature. 
Christian  truths  germinate,  grow,  and  multiply  in  a  single 
soul,  and  in  the  souls  of  the  human  race  en  masse." 

"  An  original,  suggestive,  and  well-written  book." — Northern 
Christian  Advocate. 

"In  this  volume  the  author  gives  a  natural,  common-sense  ex- 
position and  practical  application  of  the  Parable  of  the  Sower.  .  .  . 
The  book  is  well  written,  and  will  provide  interesting  and  profitable 
reading  for  the  candid  and  thoughtful." — Religious  Telescope. 


HUNT  &  EATON,  New  York,  Boston,  Pittsburg,  San  Francisco. 


^'X|X  .Yj>,  ,viv,  ,f  jv,  -•/'iv.  Xiv,  yjv,  xix  yix  ,yj>,  >  jv,  yjv.  yj>,  ,yjv.  ,vj>  ^j„  '■'jxyix*')^^ 

VOX    DEI: 

The  Doctrine   of  the   Spirit  as  it  is  set  forth  in  the 
Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 

By  R.  A.   KEDFORD,  M.  A.,  LL.  D. 

j>ino.      Cloth.     344  pages, $i  oo 

"The  specific  want  of  such  au  age  as  the  present,  when 
speculation  is  rife  and  opinions  clash,  while  at  the  same 
time  extraordinary  activity  is  aroused;  when,  because  we 
think  and  work  at  high  pressure  in  all  departments  of 
human  life,  we  are  tempted  to  be  superficial  and  too  easily 
caught  by  novelty, — our  greatest  demand  must  be  for 
materials  wherewith  to  build  up  solid  structures  of  faith." 

"  The  work  before  us  is  thoroughly  ScripUiral.  Its  appeal  is  to 
the  Word  of  God,  aud  it  is  needless  to  say 'that  the  conclusions 
reached  are  thoroughly  orthodox.  It  is  ati  excellent  treatise  ou  a  vital 
subject,  and  should  be  widely  re^aA."— Pittsburg  Clirtstian  Advocate. 


GENESIS  I    AND    MODERN    SCIENCE. 

By  CHAS.    B.    WARING,  Ph.  D. 

izmo.     Cloth.    24^  pages, $1  00 

"Can  it  be  bettered?  Nay,  is  it  possible  to  make  the 
slightest  change  in  it  without  the  most  serious  conse- 
quences to  what  we  call  science  ?  Instead  of  a  blunder, 
there  is  here  proof  of  the  omniscience  of  the  author  of  this 
account,  the  more  marvelous  because,  until  lately,  it  seemed 
just  the  opposite." 

"This  is  a  vigorous  and  able  vindication  of  the  harmony  existing 
between  modern  science  and  the  account  of  the  origin  and  early 
molding  of  the  universe  recorded  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis.  The 
argument  is  presented  in  the  gviise  of  conversations  on  successive 
evenings  between  the  author  and  an  objecting  "professor,"  who  is  the 
advocate  of  an  irreconcilable  disagreement  between  science  and  the 
Biblical  account  of  creation."  — T'.  B.  Qiiaitt-t  ly  Revicic. 


CRANSTON  &  CURTS,  Cincinnati,  Chicago,  St.  Louis. 


' 

Date  Due 

h    1 

^n^,, 

/fe^T^- 

V 

p-'- 

!  ■" 

Cf' 

[ 

M^ 

..mm* 

:«!*. 

■■■■ 

PCT  Z 

^ 

1 

^I*mJ 

^■ 

^^iHlllllllfcii 

"";      *— 

^ 

■ 

